4 minutes ago, AEIllingworth said:

The Concorde dawn thingy doesn’t need you to be facing them anymore, it is like teroch’s trigger used to be. If you are defending and the attack is range one front quadrant, flip one die to evade. That means you can overcommit more than you used to, the overshoot doesn’t rek you as badly.

(Is there a present tense of rekt?)

Just restructure the sentence. Ez

31 minutes ago, AEIllingworth said:

The Concorde dawn thingy doesn’t need you to be facing them anymore, it is like teroch’s trigger used to be. If you are defending and the attack is range one front quadrant, flip one die to evade. That means you can overcommit more than you used to, the overshoot doesn’t rek you as badly.

just quoting this so more people see it

49 minutes ago, catachanninja said:

I think a side effect of the large bids is the general weakness in upgrade cards, there's nothing I really feel like I need to try and cram into my list or that a list can't do without. This is probably a feature but a side effect of it is that bidding is now easier

Right now the distinction between casual metas and speculative tournament metas is key to consider. I feel like one will include very few swarms and the other is assumed to include at least some. If no one becomes swarm guy and ship counts settle at 2-4 total for your local players then high initiative big bid with a very tiny bit of thinking ahead on first engagements just works really well. You can replace whatever your probably semi-expensive swarm answer might have been with 6-10 pts more bid. Of course casual night games have always been basically impossible to draw conclusions from and are a time primarily for messing around with all types of things. But these are for now the main environments where most players 2.0 list choices are evolving until several tournaments happen. Leads to alot of stuff looking way better than it probably is. 10+ pt bids might be one of those things. Coruscant will just compound all of this since the bids there might be comical.

39 minutes ago, AEIllingworth said:

The Concorde dawn thingy doesn’t need you to be facing them anymore, it is like teroch’s trigger used to be. If you are defending and the attack is range one front quadrant, flip one die to evade. That means you can overcommit more than you used to, the overshoot doesn’t rek you as badly.

(Is there a present tense of rekt?)

I just meant that range control is easier for the Fangs in a heads up joust.

1 hour ago, Brunas said:

I don't know, if my options are Vader moving last or a tie fighter, I'm taking Vader moving last.

There's some disconnect though, because I can't find any 177 point lists I'd actually play.

If that tie fighter was a striker or bomber instead you'd have my attention. More ships, please!

1 hour ago, Brunas said:

I don't know, if my options are Vader moving last or a tie fighter, I'm taking Vader moving last.

There's some disconnect though, because I can't find any 177 point lists I'd actually play.

If that tie fighter was a striker or bomber instead you'd have my attention. More ships, please!

9 minutes ago, Chumbalaya said:

If that tie fighter was a striker or bomber instead you'd have my attention. More ships, please!

9 minutes ago, Chumbalaya said:

If that tie fighter was a striker or bomber instead you'd have my attention. More ships, please!

If that quote was a triple or quad post you'd have my attention. More posts, please!

1 hour ago, Boom Owl said:

Right now the distinction between casual metas and speculative tournament metas is key to consider. I feel like one will include very few swarms and the other is assumed to include at least some. If no one becomes swarm guy and ship counts settle at 2-4 total for your local players then high initiative big bid with a very tiny bit of thinking ahead on first engagements just works really well. You can replace whatever your probably semi-expensive swarm answer might have been with 6-10 pts more bid. Of course casual night games have always been basically impossible to draw conclusions from and are a time primarily for messing around with all types of things. But these are for now the main environments where most players 2.0 list choices are evolving until several tournaments happen. Leads to alot of stuff looking way better than it probably is. 10+ pt bids might be one of those things. Coruscant will just compound all of this since the bids there might be comical.

I don't know if our local casual nights are actually very casual. I suppose some players are approaching it from a "try whatever" point of view, but the core competitive group I play with don't. Truth be told, maybe we should sometimes. But, I'm sure a decent amount of my group only get 1-3 games per week on a table, so they don't want to throw away that time on some theme jank.

1 hour ago, Brunas said:

just quoting this so more people see it

1 hour ago, Brunas said:

If that quote was a triple or quad post you'd have my attention. More posts, please!

Self rekt

59 minutes ago, gennataos said:

I don't know if our local casual nights are actually very casual. I suppose some players are approaching it from a "try whatever" point of view, but the core competitive group I play with don't. Truth be told, maybe we should sometimes. But, I'm sure a decent amount of my group only get 1-3 games per week on a table, so they don't want to throw away that time on some theme jank.

I was not really talking about jank. Optimizing around a local meta that might be "avoiding" entire archetypes knowingly or unknowingly or due to the elusive "playstyle preference" leads to weird probably incorrect optimization or at least incomplete.

8 hours ago, Boom Owl said:

I was not really talking about jank. Optimizing around a local meta that might be "avoiding" entire archetypes knowingly or unknowingly or due to the elusive "playstyle preference" leads to weird probably incorrect optimization or at least incomplete.

I’m not sure what you’re even saying. It seems like you’re saying something pointed, but couching it in generalized terms.

If you’re suggesting that any given local meta warps their interpretation of what the “world” meta will be for a version of the game that’s not even officially released, I agree. Every local meta is doing that which is playing 2.0.

If you’re saying that our local meta is warping our interpretation of what the “world” meta will be for a version of the game that’s not even officially released, I also agree. I also welcome anyone to play us and prove we're wrong.

We’ll be at Crossroads! Ill tots fite u, bro!

8 hours ago, gennataos said:

If you’re suggesting that any given local meta warps their interpretation of what the “world” meta will be for a version of the game that’s not even officially released, I agree. Every local meta is doing that which is playing 2.0. 

If you’re saying that our local meta is warping our interpretation of what the “world” meta will be for a version of the game that’s not even officially released, I also agree. I also welcome anyone to play us and prove we're wrong.

We’ll be at Crossroads! Ill tots fite u, bro!

Thats what I was trying to say.

FITE ME IRL

I'll probably be at Crossroads too

4 hours ago, Boom Owl said:

Lol, that’s hiliarous.

10 hours ago, gennataos said:

I’m not sure what you’re even saying. It seems like you’re saying something pointed, but couching it in generalized terms.

If you’re suggesting that any given local meta warps their interpretation of what the “world” meta will be for a version of the game that’s not even officially released, I agree. Every local meta is doing that which is playing 2.0.

If you’re saying that our local meta is warping our interpretation of what the “world” meta will be for a version of the game that’s not even officially released, I also agree. I also welcome anyone to play us and prove we're wrong.

We’ll be at Crossroads! Ill tots fite u, bro!

Warping is probably the wrong word. “ “Incomplete” might be better.

On 9/8/2018 at 11:53 AM, AlexW said:

Warping is probably the wrong word. “ “Incomplete” might be better.

Impossible. Perhaps the archives are incomplete.

21 minutes ago, Boom Owl said:

GO PACK GO

Also much hype for official 2.0 this week and the start of the small base arc revival.

I have to say, even though I was one of the few madmen to mess around with 1.0 U-wings locally, I am loving that medium base for them in 2.0.

I think I might actually fly Saw's renegades once 2.0 drops.

2 minutes ago, FlyingAnchors said:

I have to say, even though I was one of the few madmen to mess around with 1.0 U-wings locally, I am loving that medium base for them in 2.0.

I think I might actually fly Saw's renegades once 2.0 drops.

I have been, they're pretty darn cool.

8 minutes ago, FlyingAnchors said:

I have to say, even though I was one of the few madmen to mess around with 1.0 U-wings locally, I am loving that medium base for them in 2.0.

I think I might actually fly Saw's renegades once 2.0 drops.

Yea you know what your right...all base sizes are kinda cool as long as they have weaknesses. No more base bias for now.

Time for a stupid thought exercise.
1 ship builds- Currently possible, but not gud, via dash.
How much **** would they need to glue to dash (and what flavor of ****?) to make 200 point Dash viable?

And another question- The Gold Squadron classic will be a conversion-kit-legal event, 1 week after release. What percentage of the field will each ship count be?

1-

2-

3-

4-

5-

6-

7-

8-

???

2 hours ago, Kaptin Krunch said:

And another question- The Gold Squadron classic will be a conversion-kit-legal event, 1 week after release. What percentage of the field will each ship count be?

i would expect 2-4 ship lists as the field just try and recreate lists they knew were good in 1.0. i think the number of people who have put thought into 2.0 meta is not high.

That‘s a really good episode!

Podcast: "We're not talking about anyone in particular."

Me, sitting alone, in the dark: "They're talking about me."