12 minutes ago, Crimsonwarlock said:

So both of our lists are built around punishing an opponent that moves into unfavorable terrain. We both started the game planning on killing the other guy as he enters our side of the board.

Your response is to End the game because one or both of them isn't willing to make a stupid move? (Jousting a swarm is generally stupid). Were getting into some pretty subjective territory here.

I came up a plan to win within the rules of the game, **** I even told him I was gonna come engage him in last moments of the game after we recognized the other guys game plan. He had options to play against it ( it took about 2-3 turns to get to his corner of the board). Ryan could have tried rushing me to force an even engagement or fleeing with his list to keep me from scoring points .

All this said Ryan and I had a blast cracking wise and playing for 2 hours with plastic space ships. Does it matter how we flew?

Sorta, yeah.

If that's how the marshal will rule it, I think you'll just have to adapt or not attend?

Yeah, sorry if I seemed harsh. Starvipers are wicked fun to fly, and the engagements in the other videos are wicked cool. These things can really knife-fight, when it comes down to it.

4 minutes ago, theBitterFig said:

Yeah, sorry if I seemed harsh. Starvipers are wicked fun to fly, and the engagements in the other videos are wicked cool. These things can really knife-fight, when it comes down to it.

No worries. Literally any of my other games would have been better to stream.

20 minutes ago, Crimsonwarlock said:

So both of our lists are built around punishing an opponent that moves into unfavorable terrain. We both started the game planning on killing the other guy as he enters our side of the board.

Your response is to End the game because one or both of them isn't willing to make a stupid move? (Jousting a swarm is generally stupid). Were getting into some pretty subjective territory here.

I came up a plan to win within the rules of the game, **** I even told him I was gonna come engage him in last moments of the game after we recognized the other guys game plan. He had options to play against it ( it took about 2-3 turns to get to his corner of the board). Ryan could have tried rushing me to force an even engagement or fleeing with his list to keep me from scoring points .

All this said Ryan and I had a blast cracking wise and playing for 2 hours with plastic space ships. Does it matter how we flew?

As someone who doesn't go to tournaments, but finds this particular discussion kind of interesting because of what it says about what the extremes of the game can lead to, I do have one question.

If both you and your opponent new what the endgame was going to be and were okay with it, why not just call a tournament organizer (or marshal?) over and ask if you can fast forward the game clock like 20 or 30 minutes, or something? Is that just not allowed by the rules? It seems like an option to skip over the section of game both players have already decided they were willing to skip over would be beneficial for everyone involved. For the players it reduces the chance of mistakes due to fatigue (which I assume wasn't part of the plan), and for everyone else is just speeds up something that could be fairly judged as boring from a spectators point of view.

Just now, GeneralVryth said:

As someone who doesn't go to tournaments, but finds this particular discussion kind of interesting because of what it says about what the extremes of the game can lead to, I do have one question.

If both you and your opponent new what the endgame was going to be and were okay with it, why not just call a tournament organizer (or marshal?) over and ask if you can fast forward the game clock like 20 or 30 minutes, or something? Is that just not allowed by the rules? It seems like an option to skip over the section of game both players have already decided they were willing to skip over would be beneficial for everyone involved. For the players it reduces the chance of mistakes due to fatigue (which I assume wasn't part of the plan), and for everyone else is just speeds up something that could be fairly judged as boring from a spectators point of view.

I had considered that, but our Marshall was a bit of a stickler for the rules (as is his job). The timer was even set for 75 min initially and then extended to 2 hours when someone showed him the tournament doc where it had to be 2 hours. I almost lost because of this extension as I was getting ready to move to my opponents board edge with 14 min on the clock. If this extension had come a turn later, I would have been too close to safely disengage. Fortunately for me vipers can fade back quickly.

Just now, Crimsonwarlock said:

I had considered that, but our Marshall was a bit of a stickler for the rules (as is his job). The timer was even set for 75 min initially and then extended to 2 hours when someone showed him the tournament doc where it had to be 2 hours. I almost lost because of this extension as I was getting ready to move to my opponents board edge with 14 min on the clock. If this extension had come a turn later, I would have been too close to safely disengage. Fortunately for me vipers can fade back quickly.

Did he purposefully fly the arc off the board?

37 minutes ago, Jeff Wilder said:

I would call it in a heartbeat. And I would ruthlessly shame and mock anybody who did it at any event I attended or judged. (NOTE: I'm 6'5", well over 300 pounds, and built like a truck. Ain't nobody going to do anything but meekly accept it from me. I can't globally recommend it, I guess.)

If you don't wanna @#$%in' play X-Wing, don't @#$%in' play X-Wing. Jesus @#$%'in Christ.

Unironic

14 minutes ago, gennataos said:

Did he purposefully fly the arc off the board?

He said it was on purpose, I see no reason to dig any further than that. It wouldn't have mattered anyhow.

The last engagement had 3 of his Torrents shooting. 2 of them maxed out their rolls and only got 1 damage to my shield. The other torrent rolled no hits. In order to change the outcome, his 1 reroll would have needed to land a crit, and I would have to blank out 4 greens and draw a double damage. The odds are quite significant that I would have still won even if he didn't fly the ARC off the board.

4 hours ago, KiraYamatoSF said:

Well time to unveil my suprise beacause I am E.J.

Nope, you assumed right who I am. To be fair you did see a couple clues like my post on Facebook and a topic I created yesterday.

@player3010587 thanks again man, and really my Anakin just got insanely lucky that round.

In all honesty, I lucked my way to the cut whereas you had to plow through an overall tougher strength of schedule for the cut, so let's not isolate the final. I submarined and probably didn't deserve to make the cut with my Round 6 swinging on a dime with an incredibly fortunate turn. Between my rounds, when I was perusing through tables, your game states and decisions always surprised me in a good way.

If we did what Nick said he'll do next year given equal attendance and had a day 2, I'm sure that without the cloud of fatigue from continuously going to time against beef, you'd still own me pretty hard. Fortunately, World's is not 9 seventy-five minute games in a day after driving like a Midwesterner across a state! 👍

1 hour ago, Crimsonwarlock said:

So both of our lists are built around punishing an opponent that moves into unfavorable terrain. We both started the game planning on killing the other guy as he enters our side of the board.

Your response is to End the game because one or both of them isn't willing to make a stupid move? (Jousting a swarm is generally stupid). Were getting into some pretty subjective territory here.

I came up a plan to win within the rules of the game, **** I even told him I was gonna come engage him in last moments of the game after we recognized the other guys game plan. He had options to play against it ( it took about 2-3 turns to get to his corner of the board). Ryan could have tried rushing me to force an even engagement or fleeing with his list to keep me from scoring points .

All this said Ryan and I had a blast cracking wise and playing for 2 hours with plastic space ships. Does it matter how we flew?

...yes? To preface this, none of what I'm about to say is accusing you of any shady shenanigans. Your marshal was cool with it, so that's fine. I recognize this is a bit of an edge case.

I'm just saying, that in events that *I* marshal, I would warn the players in a similar situation that they are here to play the game, not play the clock. Planning your strategy to get only a single round of attacks in as time is called is "stalling a game for time", in my book.

We are definitely getting into subjective territory here. That's the job of the marshal in an event: to interpret the rules documents and make judgements.

9 minutes ago, pheaver said:

...yes? To preface this, none of what I'm about to say is accusing you of any shady shenanigans. Your marshal was cool with it, so that's fine. I recognize this is a bit of an edge case.

I'm just saying, that in events that *I* marshal, I would warn the players in a similar situation that they are here to play the game, not play the clock. Planning your strategy to get only a single round of attacks in as time is called is "stalling a game for time", in my book.

We are definitely getting into subjective territory here. That's the job of the marshal in an event: to interpret the rules documents and make judgements.

With at least half of games going to time (24 of 41 games in round 1 were called on time), one could reasonably conclude that the clock is indeed part of the game.

How would you have handled this game if you were Marshall? Would you call the salvo if neither player moved towards each other (most likely giving the game to the guy with more dice)? What if one player moved to engage after the warning, but the other did not? Would you DQ the guy who didn't change his flight pattern? If so, at this point you've forced one player to adopt an inferior strategy (rule one of x wing is don't joust the f-ing swarm, or from my opponent's perspective, stepping into the happy fun time Starviper playhouse doesn't seem like a great option either) or get DQ'd. If not, then this rule seems to have no application in this case or is just unenforceable.

The best way to avoid this situation is to make it so the winning move is to play (objectives could force people to spread out or engage in different areas of the board).

Or what if I stated my plan was to wait for my opponent to make a mistake?

Yes, an objective system would force you to engage, but I can only judge the situation I have.

And there is definitely a difference in "this game was called at time with 250 points of dead ships" and "this game was called on time with 1 round of combat." Again, this is subjective, and where the leaders have to make hard decisions.

Without watching the game again, I would have stepped in when it became clear that neither of you were leaving your corners, probably about the time your opponent did his first K-turn. At that point, remind both players that stalling the game for time is unsporting conduct, and they need to attempt to engage their opponent.

This does not mean, for example, that you need to make a beeline straight into the swarm, nor does he have to run into the middle to get flanked by starvipers everywhere. It does mean that both players need to leave their corners.

If one player changed his strategy to work towards engagement, while the other player continued to durdle in his corner, even past my warning, then I would be forced to recommend to the organizer that the durdle-player be removed due to unsporting conduct.

I'm trying to figure out how to give a favorable reaction to @pheaver's entire approach to this without accidentally making him re-think it.

Isn't the "stalling the game" more about taking too long with dials or actions?

Anyhow, this was one really boring game. Does one game warrant all of this? And to be more specific, while I think it was boring, it was boring for spectators. Is this game for the benefit of spectators?

Meanwhile, compelling engagement with anything other than a clear, formal structure just seems off to me. Aces like Soontir run away all the time, and will often start the game running away. Is that non-engagement? Can only aces do that? Is it more wrong when a bunch of generics do it? Positioning yourself to try to take advantage of an opponent who over-commits seems like pretty core strategy to a lot of lists. However, the way an ace-list is going to position to take advantage of mistakes looks different from how a bunch of generics will do it. No doubt, there's more to it than 'aces run and force opponents to chase them to draw folks out of position, generics need to box up to lure someone into a trap,' but if one is stalling, and the other isn't, I see that as a problem.

But if there's some formal secondary goal, some way to earn victory points by being in the right place at the right time, that provides a fair way to compel players to engage. It would have potential to do so in a way where each player can determine their best path to victory. Folks aren't *forced* to play sub-optimally in objective play, even if they make mistakes in weighing their different options.

To me, that's always going to be better than relying on a judge's interpretation of the game and what constitutes non-engagement. I'm not worried that judges would be biased in favor of some players over others, but it would be far best not to leave the case to subjectivity.

I don't agree with the warning to force people to engage either. It gets too subjective on what counts as engaging.

Assuming some kind of objective or secondary point system isn't added I do think there are two changes that would further reduce the instance of this kind of outcome (which I don't think anyone involved really enjoys).

First the fortressing rule should be expanded/modified slightly to encompass the idea that the only ships that can remain in the same location several turns in a row without engaging an enemy ship are those that can do it without being within range 0 of a friendly ship, any other ship persisting in that state for X amount of rounds would be destroyed. I think flying circuits like most of the ships were doing in the match in question is fine, because the maneuverability to perform a tight circuit is part of the cost of the ship, and it's unlikely two squads are going to have circuits of the same period, so there should be odd openings that come from the different in periods. In the case of this game, forcing the Arc and Delta-7 to move would have likely forced some kind of engagement because it would be hard for the Arc to fly a circuit without exposing itself eventually, especially when maneuvering around the other friendlies.

Second, if both squads can successfully fly repeating circuits without creating an opening, start speeding up the clock or periodically fast forward it X amount of minutes, this will help the game come to a quicker resolution. If both players just want to go to final salvo, that should be an option as well.

Just my two cents as an outsider in this case.

I would love a simple objective system! My best idea so far:

After placing obstacles, player one places an objective token beyond range 3 of any board edge. Player two then moves the token to a location at range 1 of its current location. (This way, it is roughly in the center of the board, since presumably player one sets it up close to himself, and player two moves it away from player one)

At the end of a turn, if one player has at least one ship at range 0-1 of the objective token (maybe 0-2?), and the other player has none, they get a victory token.

If time is called, square the number of tokens you have and add that to your points destroyed to determine a winner. If the game ends before time is called, ignore victory tokens. So, a player isn't punished much for taking a turn or three to get into a good position at the start of the game, but durdle in your corner for too long, and you'll hand your opponent the win.

Nothing really useful here, just restating the obvious because it helps with actually reading the cards/upgrades.

Olie

• Advanced Sensors?
• Torps - i5
• Juke
• R2A6 - After you reveal your dial you may set your dial to a move of the same bearing of a speed 1 higher or lower
• R2C4 - While you perform an attack, you may spend 1 evade token to change 1 focus result to a hit result

Padme

• Luminara interacts with it kinda?
• Pilot Ability should be easy to use...
• Why does it work on every shot that every ship in arc takes or defends against? That seems ultra unnecessary.

Anakin

• 1 Force Charge...neat
• Built in Supernatural
• R2C4 + Force Charge + Torps = basically a focus? Probably super expensive

Dinee Elberg

• Matching Speed!! Speeds probably match more than we realize? Never paid attention to that.
• R2A6 seems useful like Olie

Handmaiden**

• While you defend, each friendly Naboo Handmaiden in the attack arc may spend 1 evade token to change one of your results to an evade result. If you are a Naboo Royal N-1 Starfighter, each friendly Naboo Handmaiden in the attack arc may spend 1 evade token to add 1 evade result instead.
• Pretty great way to keep a Jedi alive? Obi + 2 i1s + Anakin/Padme/Ollie?

Bravo Flight Officer

• i2 Generic
• Sure it will fit somewhere

Dial

• No k-turn
• Just a bomber dial with 3 talons
• 1 forward will make it easy to slow roll before full throttle turn

General Useful Things Probably

• Advanced Proton Torps
• Plasma Torps
• Passive Sensors

Battle Pod next...

To many new Resistance Cards....helps to have all the new words in one place. Warning no content.

BB8

• Lil Jam Bot?
• Pass the Calculate?
• Block and stuff
• Carry some crew i guess
• Pizza Bot or C3P0...

Finn

• Last part of that sentence is pretty useful...
• Super cheap 3 dice attack ship probably

Vi Moradi

• Compromising Intel: During the System Phase, if the enemy Vi Morandi is at range 0-3, flip your dial faceup.
  While you defend or perform an attack against the enemy Vi Morandi, you cannot spend focus tokens.
• Seems like the best crew carrier of the group, wont die as fast
• Makes Dropping bombs on people easier i guess?

• More Free Mods...sensing a theme
• Reminds me a bit of Lando Craft
• Opportunity cost of not taking Rose Crew on something more usefl?

Dial

• Much

Crew

• C3P0
  • Adds , Calc and Red Coordinate, While you coordinate, you can choose friendly ships beyond range 2 if they have Calc on their action bar. After you perform the Calc or Coordinate action, gain 1 calculate token.
• PZ4C0
  • Adds Calculate. At the end of the Activation Phase, you may choose 1 friendly ship at range 1-2. If you do, transfer 1 calculate token to that ship. If your revealed maneuver is blue, you may transfer 1 focus token instead.
• Leia 2 Crew
  • Adds Purple Coordinate. After a friendly ship reveals its dial, you may spend 1 . If you do, the chosen ship reduces the difficulty of that maneuver.
• Larma Dacy
  • While you have 2 or fewer stress tokens, you can perform Reenforce , Coordinate , and Jam actions, even while stressed. While you perform a white Reenforce , Coordinate , or Jam action, if you are stressed, treat that action as red.
• Korr Sella
  • After you fully execute a blue maneuver, remove all of your stress tokens.
• Kaydel Connix
  • After you reveal your dial, you may set your dial to a basic maneuver of the next higher speed. While you execute that maneuver, increase its' difficulty.
• GA97
  • Setup: Before placing forces, you may spend 3-5 Charges. If you do, choose another friendly ship and assign the It's the Resistance condition to it.
  • It's the Resistance. Setup: Start in reserve. When you deploy, you are placed within range 1 of any table edge and beyond range 3 of any enemy ship. At the start of the round, if all of the friendly GA-97's Charge are active, you must deploy. Then remove this card. After the friendly GA-97 is destroyed, you must deploy. Then gain 1 disarm token and remove this card.
    • Im not sure I fully understand the implications this has for a ship like Bob/Edon or Rey.
• Holdo
  • Before you engage, you may choose another friendly ship at range 1-2. You may transfer to that ship 1 token of a type that ship does not have. That ship may transfer 1 token to you of a type you do not have.
    • Works on...
      • Stress
      • Enemy Target Locks
      • Jam
      • Weapons Disability from Slam or Regen Astro
      • Re-Enforce Token
      • Do Conditions Count as Tokens?

Pammich Nerro Goode

• 2x Reverse or Stop ends with 2 stress + Korr to clear all at once?
• But why?
• Oh I know why...

Nodin Chavdri

• Mini Sai
• + Korr again I guess?

Logistics Division Pilot

• Logistics?

Cova Nell

• i4 + 3 Dice Attack just for revealing a red move of which there are 8? Neat
• Probably wants Leia Crew? I remember an Arc 170 that was good with Luke Gunner

Dial

• Much

thanks @sirjorj

thanks @boom owl

My only reaction to that entire expansion is

6 hours ago, theBitterFig said:

To me, that's always going to be better than relying on a judge's interpretation of the game and what constitutes non-engagement. I'm not worried that judges would be biased in favor of some players over others, but it would be far best not to leave the case to subjectivity.

@Tlfj200 here you go

10 hours ago, Boom Owl said:

• GA97
  • Setup: Before placing forces, you may spend 3-5 Charges. If you do, choose another friendly ship and assign the It's the Resistance condition to it.
  • It's the Resistance. Setup: Start in reserve. When you deploy, you are placed within range 1 of any table edge and beyond range 3 of any enemy ship. At the start of the round, if all of the friendly GA-97's Charge are active, you must deploy. Then remove this card. After the friendly GA-97 is destroyed, you must deploy. Then gain 1 disarm token and remove this card.

GA97 also adds Calculate in case you were looking to make C-3PO combos.

10 hours ago, Boom Owl said:

• Holdo
  • Before you engage, you may choose another friendly ship at range 1-2. You may transfer to that ship 1 token of a type that ship does not have. That ship may transfer 1 token to you of a type you do not have.
    • Works on...
      • Stress
      • Enemy Target Locks
      • Jam
      • Weapons Disability from Slam or Regen Astro
      • Re-Enforce Token
      • Do Conditions Count as Tokens?

The Rules Reference says Conditions use "markers" thankfully. Interesting to note, if you were to move a tractor token to a small ship, you'd be able to reposition it during the Engagement Phase. I REALLY hope Resistance doesn't gain access to Cloak Tokens.

10 hours ago, Boom Owl said:

One thing to keep in mind is that while we think of the reverse moves as -1 speed, they technically are 1 speed moves, so the speed manipulating abilities can interact with that dial in ways that aren't intuitive.

This expansion and its upgrades are setting off all sorts of alarm bells for me - lots of abilities without meaningful restrictions. It feels like we're 6 months out from some Dengaroo-level combo from the Resistance.

15 hours ago, Crimsonwarlock said:

How would you have handled this game if you were Marshall? Would you call the salvo if neither player moved towards each other (most likely giving the game to the guy with more dice)? What if one player moved to engage after the warning, but the other did not? Would you DQ the guy who didn't change his flight pattern? If so, at this point you've forced one player to adopt an inferior strategy (rule one of x wing is don't joust the f-ing swarm, or from my opponent's perspective, stepping into the happy fun time Starviper playhouse doesn't seem like a great option either) or get DQ'd. If not, then this rule seems to have no application in this case or is just unenforceable.

6 hours ago, GreenDragoon said:

@Tlfj200 here you go

13 hours ago, theBitterFig said:

To me, that's always going to be better than relying on a judge's interpretation of the game and what constitutes non-engagement. I'm not worried that judges would be biased in favor of some players over others, but it would be far best not to leave the case to subjectivity.

Sure... except that that definition will always be nebulous, and likely pretty open to abuse without a neutral arbiter (a ref/marshall) to enforce it. As someone said earlier, hockey has rules against passive play, and it's up to the ref to determine what constitutes "passive". Or further, as @Brunas noted about NC basketball - they created the shot clock rule.

But that begs a question - if you want a rule that explicit, you'll be asking for a 'engagement clock' for x-wing, and I suspect we really don't want anything that explicit.

For instance, the main focus here has been "technically, it's not fortressing!" and "it's in the rules!" - but part of the issue is, I suspect most of us believe that it not only shouldn't be a rule, but also likely that the devs explicitly wanted to stop the general idea of stalling and not engaging.

We act like we cannot spot it... but we can, and do recognize it. Tryin to say "I was just about to do something different" doesn't actually change anything, nor is it believable.

This is not actually an endictment on players - you can watch two streamed games at atlanta where I k-turn rexlar to block a shuttle. In particular, I did it in one of those games for 4 turns* in a row (more than the 2 times the rules try and note). I'd rather just have the rules enforced, and lose the ability to do this kind of thing if it means so does everyone else, than continue working on "not fortressing' strategies to deal with stuff. But again, that assumes the playing field is level.

*Considering my biggest flaw was not engaging the shuttle fast enough, this was a terrible idea. But that's not really the point.

Thannison meta overlooked as **** already with Braylen, Ten, V19's, Scorch, Nien, etc.

If I don't see moar Thanos' Offspring with the release of a wombo combo pack that abuses/disregards stress on a lumbering boat, my near-0 faith in the public's list choices will become a negative faith if that's possible.

1 hour ago, Tlfj200 said:

*Considering my biggest flaw was not engaging the shuttle fast enough, this was a terrible idea. But that's not really the point.

I know your comment was in small print but try Tavson out for a few games and you might breakdown that Shuttles not engaging problem. Also you get to practice SuperFree Kylo which is great.

1 hour ago, Tlfj200 said:

We act like we cannot spot it... but we can, and do recognize it. Tryin to say "I was just about to do something different" doesn't actually change anything, nor is it believable.

This is not actually an endictment on players

On the fortressing as long as a Judges intentions are communicated clearly at the start of the tournament I am happy to play by their rules. Its their call.

Players though....thats another story...there is a significant % of the player base that does not "know it when they see it". They see whatever makes them the victim or lets them be angry.

I think there is a ton of nuance here. Probably a bit more nuance than all the other fuzzy x-wing rules or grey zones that we deal with all the time or have dealt with long enough that they are less fuzzy.