Frequency is basically all I look at. Frequency in full cut results and in wider community conversations.

If you pair the limited tournament data with some basic amount of logic and actual game time its usually pretty accurate. The thing I use the tournament results for the most is actually just to identify player preferences that dont make logical sense. If I try to predict the cut based only on what I consider “optimal” lists its almost always wrong since player preferences lean towards lower ship counts, more hp, and easier jousts. The data is really helpful for identifying popular trends.

6 hours ago, Sunitsa said:

NORDICS TOP16.

No idea on total attendance, lists were posted by Jesper on a FB group

• Fenn Guri Teroch

• Boba 4Lom Palob

• Boba Palob l337 Quad

• Jonus 4xGamma (barrage+bombs)

• Wedge Sabine NorraY JanOrs

• Wedge Luke Sabine

• Wedge Garven Dutch (2x selfless)

• Rhymer Jendon x2Gamma x1Scimitar

• Redline Deathrain 2xScimitar

• EchoSloane PureSabacc 2xSaberAce

• RedlineAdvSens Deathrain Jonus Rhymer

• Boba Guri (198, dengar gunner on boba)

• Boba 4Lom Palob

• RedlineAdvSens Deathrain LambdaVader

• Boba 4Lom Palob

• WhisperVader Deathrain Deathfire Nightbeast

3 Rebels, 6 scum, 7 imperials

Only 1 scum list without boba.

Wedge in all rebel lists.

Only 1 Sloane.

5 Boba, 4 Deathrain, 4 Palob, 3 Redline, 3 Wedge, 3 generic bombers and other things I stopped counting

EDIT: another interesting thing is only 4 lists had a ps6, 3 of which were rebels. 9 carried ordnance

Honestly, outside of the Boba based lists this is a pretty interesting top16 if you consider the past 3 large tournaments as where the meta was. 7 imperial and only 3 Redline? Only 1 Whisper, and 1 Echo? Rebels?

1 minute ago, Tlfj200 said:

Wait, Belgian nationals happened already?

Does anyone have the European Nationals Schedule? (US, UK, and Canada already happened).

UK and Italy already happened and they were 1.0

Spain was the first one with 2.0, Belgium and Nordics (basically Scandinavia+Denmark) are ending today.

Next week or in a fortnight there should be Polish and Netherlands but I can't find references.

I don't remember if French and Germany already had theirs in 1.0 this year.

Finding stuff on fb is incredibly hard ffs

also lol ffg https://www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/op/2018-national-championships/2018-x-wing-national-championships/

1 minute ago, Sunitsa said:

also lol ffg https://www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/op/2018-national-championships/2018-x-wing-national-championships/

Yep

16 minutes ago, Sunitsa said:

UK and Italy already happened and they were 1.0

Spain was the first one with 2.0, Belgium and Nordics (basically Scandinavia+Denmark) are ending today.

Next week or in a fortnight there should be Polish and Netherlands but I can't find references.

I don't remember if French and Germany already had theirs in 1.0 this year.

Finding stuff on fb is incredibly hard ffs

also lol ffg https://www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/op/2018-national-championships/2018-x-wing-national-championships/

3.11. is Slovakia Nationals, and 17.11. is Czech Nationals.

15 minutes ago, Sunitsa said:

UK and Italy already happened and they were 1.0

Spain was the first one with 2.0, Belgium and Nordics (basically Scandinavia+Denmark) are ending today.

Next week or in a fortnight there should be Polish and Netherlands but I can't find references.

I don't remember if French and Germany already had theirs in 1.0 this year.

Finding stuff on fb is incredibly hard ffs

also lol ffg https://www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/op/2018-national-championships/2018-x-wing-national-championships/

I think German nationals may have passed. Dutch nationals is the 17th and French nationals is the 24th of November.

2 hours ago, Tlfj200 said:

Also, it's worth noting that we are still formulating and posing questions, and frankly, without a listjuggler export, we're not completely parsing all upgrades and stuff, so the analysis is broader than usual.


Lastly, while an initial picture is being formed (limited data), we can know stuff, but it suffers from the "does the past predict the future?" issue, and since we're at the beginning, there's always a chance the initial data was basically "on a different bell curve" than what ends up being the average/trend.

Maybe the first few tournaments are super different and weird (actually possible, in particular because we all really don't know what we're doing), or also possible the core nugget of a trend is there too.

But I suspect anyone with a major tournament coming up is looking at the last (now 4) tournaments and trying their damnedest to figure out what to expect.

I want to drill a little bit further on the fact that we don’t know what we’re doing. All of these arguments are predicated on a very reasonable assumption that a global meta will (has?) shake(n) out and where all the tournaments that are geographically distinct can be directly compared.

Especially given that we can’t collate lists as efficiently as first edition, there’s a second possible scenario where we’re all Poland now: everyone’s running lists that can rule their local/regional meta, but they are NOT directly comparable because you’ve got to clear a different swiss gauntlet.

Restated as a folk saying, when all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

Edit: in all seriousness, this is actually an unknowable counterfactual for now. To distinguish between this and what the community seems to be assuming, we’d have to watch a given community over time and see how it reacts to overall meta movements.

2 hours ago, Sunitsa said:

https://www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/op/2018-national-championships/2018-x-wing-national-championships/

This is amazing

8 minutes ago, PaulRuddSays said:

I want to drill a little bit further on the fact that we don’t know what we’re doing. All of these arguments are predicated on a very reasonable assumption that a global meta will (has?) shake(n) out and where all the tournaments that are geographically distinct can be directly compared.

Especially given that we can’t collate lists as efficiently as first edition, there’s a second possible scenario where we’re all Poland now: everyone’s running lists that can rule their local/regional meta, but they are NOT directly comparable because you’ve got to clear a different swiss gauntlet.

Restated as a folk saying, when all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

Edit: in all seriousness, this is actually an unknowable counterfactual for now. To distinguish between this and what the community seems to be assuming, we’d have to watch a given community over time and see how it reacts to overall meta movements.

That's possible, and as more data gets entered, we'll know.

But there does seem to be some underlying global trends.

Out of interest, do you include the UKTC data in your analysis?

47 teams (1 each of Imp, Rebel, Scum). 141 players seems a useful data point despite the team format for the tournament. (Meaning you could "slightly" engineer matchups, but not by much.) And all the lists were published.

34 minutes ago, Tlfj200 said:

That's possible, and as more data gets entered, we'll know.

But there does seem to be some underlying global trends.

That‘s something I always wanted to look at but never got around to do it: splitting the data by culture/regions and see what changes.

13 minutes ago, Darth Seridur said:

Out of interest, do you include the UKTC data in your analysis?

47 teams (1 each of Imp, Rebel, Scum). 141 players seems a useful data point despite the team format for the tournament. (Meaning you could "slightly" engineer matchups, but not by much.) And all the lists were published.

No, because it's hard to try to isolate individual performances for factions and or ships because of the format.

14 minutes ago, Brunas said:

No, because it's hard to try to isolate individual performances for factions and or ships because of the format.

Fair and reasonable.

51 minutes ago, Darth Seridur said:

Out of interest, do you include the UKTC data in your analysis?

47 teams (1 each of Imp, Rebel, Scum). 141 players seems a useful data point despite the team format for the tournament. (Meaning you could "slightly" engineer matchups, but not by much.) And all the lists were published.

I wanted to do that (at least for the teams that went 4-1) and I actually have all the lists, but I lack personal records, so it's pretty much pointless other than seeing what top teams judged worth to bring in

For refernce, those are the lists of the 7 teams that made at least 4-1

UKTC 4-1+ teams

Rebels

• Luke 4xBandit

• NorraY Wedge Luke (no supnat)

• Luke Wedge Kyle (no supnat)

• Luke Wedge Benthic (no supnat)

• Luke Wedge Thane

• Luke Wedge Sabine

• Wedge 3xBladeSquadron

Scum

• Nym Han Palob

• Guri 4Lom Palob

• Drea 2x Quad 4xBinayre

• Fenn Teroch Palob

• Unkar 6x Quad

• Boba Guri (191)

• Koshka Guri 4Lom

Imperial

• Howlrunner Iden 5xAcademy

• 4xSigma

• Soontir Redline Deathrain

• Vader Sabacc Sai Academy (no supnat)

• Soontir Redline Sai Academy

• Whisper Rexler Jendon

• Jonus Deathrain 2xGamma

Only 1 Boba.

Out of 5 Luke, only 2 had SupNat. The only Vader was played without a force upgrade.

3 Swarms out of 21 players, 2 scums and 1 imperial. No teams brought more than one swarm.

All teams had at least one ps 6 (mostly Wedge who was played by 6 team out 7). Only 2 teams didn't bring both Luke AND Wedge (the one bringing only Luke won the event).

Guri and Palob were the most played scum pilot with 3 teams bringing them.

Rebels were the less varied faction.

EDIT: Lists are in placement order, so the first of of every column was from the team ended first and so on
EDIT2: Can you spot which lists were brought by my teammates?

4 hours ago, Sunitsa said:

Next week or in a fortnight there should be Polish

Polish Nationals were in late August one of the last in 1.0.

Hungarian Nationals will be 19th January

1 hour ago, Sunitsa said:

I thought some of the lists, particularly the top Luke list showed how strong 1.0 thinking can be in 2.0.

6 hours ago, Sunitsa said:

also lol ffg https://www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/op/2018-national-championships/2018-x-wing-national-championships/

Aren't nationals going away in favor of hyperspace somethings?

6 minutes ago, catachanninja said:

Aren't nationals going away in favor of hyperspace somethings?

Yes, but for next year.

this year everyone has their nationals like normal.

Except Canada. I'm 99% sure the prizes never went out for Canadian Nats… (Though I'm not expecting anything, I intentionally bombed)

@Sunitsa interesting stat for you, I'll spare you from the 2 hours of nonsense surrounding it: Lists containing Wedge + Thane make the cut roughly as often as rebels do without either (~12%). Granted, Wedge or Thane are in 70%+ of Rebel lists so we are looking at really small sample sizes.

Not really sure what conclusions can be drawn there - they're such an overwhelming majority of Rebel lists, but it seems like you aren't much better (or worse) off without them. If you excluded Luke there were effectively no rebel lists, period.

3 hours ago, Brunas said:

@Sunitsa interesting stat for you, I'll spare you from the 2 hours of nonsense surrounding it: Lists containing Wedge + Thane make the cut roughly as often as rebels do without either (~12%). Granted, Wedge or Thane are in 70%+ of Rebel lists so we are looking at really small sample sizes.

Not really sure what conclusions can be drawn there - they're such an overwhelming majority of Rebel lists, but it seems like you aren't much better (or worse) off without them. If you excluded Luke there were effectively no rebel lists, period.

So I'm quite happy (as everyone) that Rebels have won a thing, especially with Wedge.

To me it confirms that lists with Wedge have the potential to win big tournaments, even if the average placements are not great.

Which is what I don't like about the statistics - I don't care what the average placement is, I'm more interested in what is the full potential.

Clearly Wedge is good in right list and right hands - even if perhaps it is not "easy mode" to play him since the average placements are not that great (so the statistics might be useful in giving us this part of information).

EDIT: And also Sabine was quite good as a 4th ship in the winner's list. Seems that she really excels at baiting, if the rest of the list can smash the hammer.

16 minutes ago, baranidlo said:

I'm more interested in what is the full potential.

How can we tell?

4 minutes ago, GreenDragoon said:

How can we tell?

I would always value results of subjective playtesting (grinding the ship through the gauntlet) above results from tournaments (although both have information value).

Mainly because results from playtesting will give you much more context information than just looking at the scores does, and also (to put it frankly) I'm not that interested how "bad" (or "average") players are using the ship.

For that reason I would also value just looking on what made top cuts above the exact conversion percentages.

If the ship makes the top cut repeatedly, then that demonstrates high potential (even if average conversion is low).

Although in more complicated cases it might require a unique innovater list building mastermind to really unlock the ships potential (see Dengaroo).

In these cases we're kind of out of luck (neither grinding nor statistics will help).

4 hours ago, Brunas said:

@Sunitsa interesting stat for you, I'll spare you from the 2 hours of nonsense surrounding it: Lists containing Wedge + Thane make the cut roughly as often as rebels do without either (~12%). Granted, Wedge or Thane are in 70%+ of Rebel lists so we are looking at really small sample sizes.

Not really sure what conclusions can be drawn there - they're such an overwhelming majority of Rebel lists, but it seems like you aren't much better (or worse) off without them. If you excluded Luke there were effectively no rebel lists, period.

Now that I think about it, I don't think I played with or against a rebel list that didn't have either Luke or Wedge.

Have you guys ever tried something without xwing aces?