1 hour ago, Makaze said:

All of the advanceds need a TL to not joust as overly expensive TIE fighters. Vader doesn't care since he's I6 and has actions coming out of his exhaust port, but the others have a tough time on the initial engage

Coordinate ships can help that for sure, and they have surprisingly high health/agility for the cost.

I refuse to admit that we're already in a state of extreme ace-wing where things with initiative lower than 6 can never get target locks.

1 minute ago, Kieransi said:

I refuse to admit that we're already in a state of extreme ace-wing where things with initiative lower than 6 can never get target locks.

Whether you admit it or not, metas are already forming states of extreme ace-wing where things with initiative lower than 6 can never get target locks... I exaggerate, but aces are still the preferred method of play for a large number of players.

1 hour ago, Kieransi said:

@Boom Owl not sure I'd be so hasty to write off all the non-Vader TIE Advanced. They aren't astoundingly good, but I've been noticing that they're a lot better than people say.

Generic advanced is not as good as a barrage bomber for more or less the same task AND more expensive. I don't know why you'd bother.

3 minutes ago, Kieransi said:

things with initiative lower than 6 can never get target locks.

Boba needs no target lock!

2 minutes ago, skotothalamos said:

Boba needs no target lock!

Boba is his own missile.

11 minutes ago, LagJanson said:

Whether you admit it or not, metas are already forming states of extreme ace-wing where things with initiative lower than 6 can never get target locks... I exaggerate, but aces are still the preferred method of play for a large number of players.

I have noticed that. I think part of it is people feel most comfortable shoving three or so ships in a list, all of which are the highest initiative pilot available to that ship. All in all, other than pure efficiency ships, most ships don't seem to charge enough for initiative. I think effectively, 2.0 plays very similarly to 1.0, where each ship has like one pilot that's very clearly the "correct" choice. The only minor consolation is that the deltas are less than they were in 1.0

16 minutes ago, LagJanson said:

Whether you admit it or not, metas are already forming states of extreme ace-wing where things with initiative lower than 6 can never get target locks... I exaggerate, but aces are still the preferred method of play for a large number of players.

I think in part it's because they made so many really strong I5s. One way to get an edge over I5 and a big bid is I6 + efficiency.

22 minutes ago, skotothalamos said:

Boba needs no target lock!

Boba is his own missile.

Also, people are just experimenting.

I wouldn't hold to hard to whatever the meta is now, vs 3+ months from now, as people experiment and settle in.

11 minutes ago, Biophysical said:

I think in part it's because they made so many really strong I5s. One way to get an edge over I5 and a big bid is I6 + efficiency.

There also definitely some pure efficiency lists that can destroy aces. I don't think the mix of I5-I6 centric lists vs Swarms has settled much yet (though some local scenes seem to be just 2-3 ships for days, being the swarm guy in that environment leads to lots of easy wins). If anything people might be defaulting to comfort food until list juggler shows them another way.

9 minutes ago, Kieransi said:

I think effectively, 2.0 plays very similarly to 1.0, where each ship has like one pilot that's very clearly the "correct" choice. The only minor consolation is that the deltas are less than they were in 1.0

I was very tempted to take a six ship Rebel swarm to a store champ this coming weekend. Instead I'm probably take four Rebel ships with "the correct" pilots for the type. I think I'll likely do better as, for instance, with a swarm it's reliant on me not making mistakes where as Luke will luck himself out of mistakes now and then.

1 hour ago, defkhan1 said:

He's definitely not Wedge tier, and I wouldn't even call him overcosted. One of the few ships with access to a regular 5 die attack and incredibly strong innate defense at range 1? He doesn't need to be upgraded, thus the high base cost. He can definitely die if you leave him at range 2 or even 3, but he's an i6 with a 5 straight and boost. It's not that hard to stay range 1 of stuff.

His ability is powerful for sure, but he lost the ability to double reposition or just focus+lock and while the title did get buffed, the loss of autothrusters is a big nerf IMO. Any turrented ship can turn off the title at range 1 and he has no autothrusters for when that happens. Yes, he costs exactly the same as the standard 1.0 PTL version, but he is weaker. The big 2.0 buff for him was the initiative changes.

Double Post

3 minutes ago, LagJanson said:

I was very tempted to take a six ship Rebel swarm to a store champ this coming weekend. Instead I'm probably take four Rebel ships with "the correct" pilots for the type. I think I'll likely do better as, for instance, with a swarm it's reliant on me not making mistakes where as Luke will luck himself out of mistakes now and then.

Yeah... already most of that "listbuilding creativity" that we talked about 2.0 enabling is dead.

29 minutes ago, Brunas said:

Generic advanced is not as good as a barrage bomber for more or less the same task AND more expensive. I don't know why you'd bother.

At the current costs, a barrage bomber seems like the correct choice almost all the time for a generic filler.

4 minutes ago, Kieransi said:

Yeah... already most of that "listbuilding creativity" that we talked about 2.0 enabling is dead.

Depends at what level you're playing. My casual night is dominated by U-Wings, ARCs, TIE Punishers and TIE Fighters. We do have one guy flying Fett, but he hits a lot of tournaments so is constantly tweaking.

23 minutes ago, Kieransi said:

Yeah... already most of that "listbuilding creativity" that we talked about 2.0 enabling is dead.

a) Metas are going to happen. Anyone who thought a meta wasn't going to form in 2.0 was naive.

b) People who aren't still experimenting are probably missing out. The meta is definitely not set right now and new lists will still be discovered.

c) What many of us were excited about with 2.0 was the ability to adjust points, not that we thought the launch balance was going to be perfect. So while there is currently one "best" pilot for most ships, that can still be tweaked to ensure something closer to parity than today and much closer to parity than 1.0

d) the gap between a good and a great list are much smaller in 2.0 than 1.0, and should get even closer once points are rebalanced. So someone who wants to fly a trench run squad, or a A/B/X/Y squad should be more able to do so in 2.0 than 1.0, even if it's not a S-tier list.

31 minutes ago, Scott Pilgrim2 said:

His ability is powerful for sure, but he lost the ability to double reposition or just focus+lock and while the title did get buffed, the loss of autothrusters is a big nerf IMO. Any turrented ship can turn off the title at range 1 and he has no autothrusters for when that happens. Yes, he costs exactly the same as the standard 1.0 PTL version, but he is weaker. The big 2.0 buff for him was the initiative changes.

This is true, but at the same time turrets are much less powerful than they were in 1.0. If anything, the loss of Autothrusters just makes him more vulnerable to stray attacks at range 3, which any ace should be. I think at the current power level of 2.0, Fenn Rau is one of the best ships in the game.

9 minutes ago, defkhan1 said:

This is true, but at the same time turrets are much less powerful than they were in 1.0. If anything, the loss of Autothrusters just makes him more vulnerable to stray attacks at range 3, which any ace should be. I think at the current power level of 2.0, Fenn Rau is one of the best ships in the game.

Fair enough - I personally put him at Wedge tier for the cost, but that doesn't mean he isn't super powerful. I would easily put him in top 5 for Scum.

10 minutes ago, Boom Owl said:

There also definitely some pure efficiency lists that can destroy aces. I don't think the mix of I5-I6 centric lists vs Swarms has settled much yet (though some local scenes seem to be just 2-3 ships for days, being the swarm guy in that environment leads to lots of easy wins). If anything people might be defaulting to comfort food until list juggler shows them another way.

There's something that I think is an issue for 4-5 ships. Swarms can sustain losses very well. They're usually not much less tough than their slightly beefier brethren that are in 4-5 ship lists, they just do less damage. 3-ship lists have points for Initiative, and can use that initiative and higher chassis quality to be in places where they won't receive a lot of high quality shots.

4-5 ship lists will almost always have someone that can take the brunt of the opposing list, and don't typically have the initiative or maneuverability to do something about it. Their margin for error ends up being narrower as a result.

12 minutes ago, Biophysical said:

There's something that I think is an issue for 4-5 ships. Swarms can sustain losses very well. They're usually not much less tough than their slightly beefier brethren that are in 4-5 ship lists, they just do less damage. 3-ship lists have points for Initiative, and can use that initiative and higher chassis quality to be in places where they won't receive a lot of high quality shots.

 4-5 ship lists will almost always have someone that can take the brunt of the opposing list, and don't typically have the initiative or maneuverability to do something about it. Their margin for error ends up being narrower as a result.

The initiative bids are all over the map for me.

I can build a 3 ship list with some investment in each ship and still end up at 185-189 pts with at least one "answer" for swarms and generally high init.

But I can also build a 4 ship list at around 190 that does a little bit of everything, maybe all of it adequately but not great as you described.

I always assumed removing VI would lead to crazy bids but it seems like its happening for different reasons than just no VI ( ships are cheap, some upgrades aren't, the meta is unformed, people are lazy and dont like flipping lots of dials, etc).

@Brunas

Can you give everyone confused reacts instead of likes for 2.0?

7 minutes ago, Boom Owl said:

@Brunas

Can you give everyone confused reacts instead of likes for 2.0?

Rexlerbrath 2.0 when?

On the latest podcast, Zack mentioned a list that included 4-LOM a few times. I did not catch the whole list, but I was curious what it would be. I'm putting 4-LOM and Palob together with something else (right now, Boba, but I tried Teroch plus Escape Craft, too). I was just curious what the build was. The 4-LOM I've been loving so far is w/ Advanced Sensors, 0-0-0, and Mist Hunter.

his list was

Lando

4 lom

Old Teroch

Fenn Rau

No upgrades.

4 Lom always dies in a big ball of fire, i would hesitate to give him more than 10 points of upgrades.