6 minutes ago, Brunas said:

In the meantime I found the article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Threefold_repetition

In chess, in order for a position to be considered the same, each player must have the same set of legal moves each time, including the possible rights to castle and capture en passant. Positions are considered the same if the same type of piece is on a given square. So, for instance, if a player has two knights and the knights are on the same squares, it does not matter if the positions of the two knights have been exchanged. The game is not automatically drawn if a position occurs for the third time – one of the players, on their move turn, must claim the draw with the arbiter.

tl;dr kinda. You can't alternative moving bishops back and forth and pretend you're playing.

And then we have Fischer vs Petrosian (1971) noted in that same article, where the better player in the worse position manipulated the anti-fortressing rule to turn a loss into a draw.

ALL RULES WILL BE MANIPULATED

14 minutes ago, skotothalamos said:

And then we have Fischer vs Petrosian (1971) noted in that same article, where the better player in the worse position manipulated the anti-fortressing rule to turn a loss into a draw.

ALL RULES WILL BE MANIPULATED

Exactly, rules exist to define what is allowable.

23 minutes ago, skotothalamos said:

And then we have Fischer vs Petrosian (1971) noted in that same article, where the better player in the worse position manipulated the anti-fortressing rule to turn a loss into a draw.

ALL RULES WILL BE MANIPULATED

7 minutes ago, Crimsonwarlock said:

Exactly, rules exist to define what is allowable.

Right, so we all seem to agree that's why we have the marshal (I think?).

24 minutes ago, Brunas said:

In the meantime I found the article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Threefold_repetition

In chess, in order for a position to be considered the same, each player must have the same set of legal moves each time, including the possible rights to castle and capture en passant. Positions are considered the same if the same type of piece is on a given square. So, for instance, if a player has two knights and the knights are on the same squares, it does not matter if the positions of the two knights have been exchanged. The game is not automatically drawn if a position occurs for the third time – one of the players, on their move turn, must claim the draw with the arbiter.

tl;dr kinda. You can't alternative moving bishops back and forth and pretend you're playing.

There's also a rule in chess where if too long has passed without pawn moves or without piece captures, a draw can occur. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifty-move_rule

Quote

The fifty-move rule – if in the previous 50 moves by each side, no pawn has moved and no capture has been made, a draw may be claimed by either player. Here again, the draw is not automatic and must be claimed if the player wants the draw. If the player whose turn it is to move has made only 49 such moves, he may write his next move on the scoresheet and claim a draw. As with the threefold repetition, the right to claim the draw is forfeited if it is not used on that move, but the opportunity may occur again.

• A similar rule was added in section 9.6 of the FIDE laws of chess on July 1, 2014. If no capture or no pawn move has occurred in the last 75 moves (by both players), the game is automatically a draw (i.e. a player does not have to claim it). If the last move was a checkmate, the checkmate stands.

But Chess is also a game much more suited to this style of draw than X-Wing.

39 minutes ago, Brunas said:

snipping not to dismiss your point, but just point out that the only reason objectives exist in games is to give you a reason to engage. It's actually a really hard problem to solve.

Thinking about so many other miniatures games, this seems to hold true.

1 hour ago, skotothalamos said:

And then we have Fischer vs Petrosian (1971) noted in that same article, where the better player in the worse position manipulated the anti-fortressing rule to turn a loss into a draw.

ALL RULES WILL BE MANIPULATED

watching online chess is really interesting because people will duplicate a move like twice during tournaments to more or less offer an ID - if the opponent also does nothing it's like an indicator that they're cool drawing.

turning losses into draws is basically what chess is about, though.

24 minutes ago, Brunas said:

watching online chess is really interesting

12 minutes ago, gennataos said:

Seriously though:

8 minutes ago, Brunas said:

Seriously though:

I mentioned back in December I think, but I got into chess a bit and even the 3min bullets are too short for me...

But the insights on lichess are amazing and I wish we'd have some form of centipawn measurement for us here.

Speaking of Magnus Carlsen, he often opts for a minor suboptimal play early in matches against somewhat significantly lower-elo players than himself to avoid a book game and skip right to the theory. I personally think it's a fascinating tactic that I try in X-wing (although the player pool I can do it with is significantly lower because you know, skill relative to the field and all. I don't do it until I'm absolutely sure. I gather my data by speedplaying and then perusing tables between rounds, I look up from my game across the table or behind me pretending to think about my set dial waiting for opponents, etc.) because it increases the likelihood of said opponent breaking off and trying too hard to bite the bait. I really like this as opposed to them memorizing openings or dial movesets from streams and stuff because even if they are making the mistake and I am playing optimally, I want them to make a harder mistake so I have a lower likelihood of the wrong end of the bell curve.

But it has been embarrassing when it fails (and I have failed with it more often than I care to admit), so I'm reeling it in and only using the info between rounds sparingly.

28 minutes ago, player3010587 said:

I personally think it's a fascinating tactic that I try in X-wing (although the player pool I can do it with is significantly lower because you know, skill relative to the field and all. I don't do it until I'm absolutely sure. I gather my data by speedplaying and then perusing tables between rounds, I look up from my game across the table or behind me pretending to think about my set dial waiting for opponents, etc.) because it increases the likelihood of said opponent breaking off and trying too hard to bite the bait.

can you expand? I don't understand what you're talking about

38 minutes ago, GreenDragoon said:

can you expand? I don't understand what you're talking about

It's more of that high level x wing looking like low level x wing stuff.

Sometimes, when playing a knowledgeable opponent, the best move isn't the best move because it's expected and thus, will be countered.

That and if you sightread/adapt better than most, running a less studied line of play can tilt things in your favor. Take list that loves to joust (Ketsu/old t/ talonbane) in a matchup vs tie swarm. Jousting down the edge of the board is very well studied and many players (particularly those running jousty lists) have a familiarity with the rule of 11. If you instead joust the tie swarm at a 45 degree angle you may gain some advantage by making the tie swarm player think on the fly in a new situation (even though rule one of x wing is don't joust the f-ing TIE swarm player). In this case spacing needs to be eyeballed and rocks may be in the jousting Lanes. Approaching at a 45 Lenghtens the opposing formation increasing the odds of the swarm not being fully engaged.

7 minutes ago, Crimsonwarlock said:

Sometimes, when playing a knowledgeable opponent, the best move isn't the best move because it's expected and thus, will be countered.

I understand that part. Also, @Brunas is now triggered again.

What I don't understand is:

• "I gather my data by speedplaying and then perusing tables between rounds, I look up from my game across the table or behind me pretending to think about my set dial waiting for opponents, etc"
  • what does that mean? "Speedplaying" means setting dials really fast. But why does he look behind himself?!
  • what data? Trying to gauge how good the opponent is?
• "I really like this as opposed to them memorizing openings or dial movesets from streams and stuff "
  • who does such a thing? I thought I go as close as you reasonably can, and even I am winging it

8 minutes ago, GreenDragoon said:

I understand that part. Also, @Brunas is now triggered again.

What I don't understand is:

• "I gather my data by speedplaying and then perusing tables between rounds, I look up from my game across the table or behind me pretending to think about my set dial waiting for opponents, etc"
  • what does that mean? "Speedplaying" means setting dials really fast. But why does he look behind himself?!
  • what data? Trying to gauge how good the opponent is?
• "I really like this as opposed to them memorizing openings or dial movesets from streams and stuff "
  • who does such a thing? I thought I go as close as you reasonably can, and even I am winging it

yeah, the basic premise was understandable, the word salad in the middle was not.

1 hour ago, GreenDragoon said:

can you expand? I don't understand what you're talking about

TL;DR, I unsuccessfully attempt to apply chess tourney strats to X wing. It was indeed mostly gibberish anyway, so any attempt to further explain would result in more gibberish.

I really wish N1s had come out the 6th. It's the ship I've been wanting to play for months, and I've really just lost all motivation to play any x wing until the points update and the new wave comes out. Combination of rebels being good which means the game is bad, paired with a delayed wave and a points update on the horizon has rekt me bois.

3 minutes ago, SnooSnarry said:

I really wish N1s had come out the 6th. It's the ship I've been wanting to play for months, and I've really just lost all motivation to play any x wing until the points update and the new wave comes out. Combination of rebels being good which means the game is bad, paired with a delayed wave has rekt me bois.

contrary to popular opinion, it's both good and healthy to just take breaks sometimes

23 minutes ago, SnooSnarry said:

I really wish N1s had come out the 6th. It's the ship I've been wanting to play for months, and I've really just lost all motivation to play any x wing until the points update and the new wave comes out. Combination of rebels being good which means the game is bad, paired with a delayed wave and a points update on the horizon has rekt me bois.

12 minutes ago, svelok said:

contrary to popular opinion, it's both good and healthy to just take breaks sometimes

I've ended up taking an involuntary break due to working during the latest Hyperspace Trial, as well as working early the morning after the primary local play time, which goes fairly late. And while I'm itching to get back to the game (and use my Hyperspace dice and rulers for the first time), it has been good for me, I think.

So looking at that Chess ****, is a chess-clock-like system a potential possibility for something that could be implemented? something like how when one player locks in dials, the clock starts, and if one player gets X more minutes on their clock they get opponent+X time for dials each round?

Minimum round counters maybe as well? All this on top of objectives of course.

Also, god **** Magnus's name is great- Dr. Drunkenstein.

What are realistic guesses at the point cost range of the following? Assume none of them scale.

• Holdo ( 6 )
• Pizza Bot ( 4 )
• Leia Crew ( 11 )
• Cova Nell Transport ( 41 )
• Finn Pod ( 35 )
• Rose Tico ( 4... )
• Contraband Cybernetics ( 2 )
• Poe ( 65 )
• Angled Deflectors ( ?? )
• Ollie N1 ( ?? )
• Padme N1 ( ?? )
• Anakin N1 ( ?? )

Leia at 11 feels really cheap to me. She's Kanan but better, but takes the opportunity cost of two crew slots instead of 1. 11 would be near auto-include unless their goal is to price every crew super cheap and make the decision hard at least.

Finn with predator is 1 threat...so maybe expect to see him in the mid 20s.

52 minutes ago, Boom Owl said:

What are realistic guesses at the point cost range of the following? Assume none of them scale.

• Holdo ( 6 )
• Pizza Bot ( 4 )
• Leia Crew ( 11 )
• Cova Nell Transport ( 41 )
• Finn Pod ( 35 )
• Rose Tico ( 4 )
• Contraband Cybernetics ( 2 )
• Poe ( 65 )
• Angled Deflectors ( ?? )
• Ollie N1 ( ?? )
• Padme N1 ( ?? )
• Anakin N1 ( ?? )

I think the cost of both the transport and the pod you have listed is really high. They both have pretty terrible dials and mostly red actions. I am more interested in what they do with the RZ-2 prices. They are currently the only thing keeping resistance even partially afloat. Lulo needs to go up a couple but if the rest raise to much without major decreases elsewhere Resistance will be in big trouble.

48 minutes ago, Caduceus01 said:

I am more interested in what they do with the RZ-2 prices. They are currently the only thing keeping resistance even partially afloat.

They're currently the only thing people see do well on MetaWing and adopt/emulate. They're the Rebel beef of Resistance in that they're easy to fly relative to other stuff in the faction because of the rotating arc. L'ulo is individually more of a linchpin than A-Wings as a whole, but there hasn't been a ton of experimentation with the bombers, falcons or half the T-70s.

57 minutes ago, Caduceus01 said:

Lulo needs to go up a couple but if the rest raise to much without major decreases elsewhere Resistance will be in big trouble.

I think sleeping on the transport and/or the new crew is a mistake. The introduction of (presumably cheap?) ship-native coordinate has always had a impact on a faction....and some of the crew seem points-dependent broken.

L'ulo- 40 (+2)

Talli- 36 (+1)

Resistance Sympathizer- 64 (-4)

Han Solo- 72 (-4)

Chewbacca- 70 (-2)

Rey- 78 (-2)

Black Squadron Ace, Tubbs, Kare Kun, Ello all -1

Amilyn Holdo- 6 (Swarm Tactics becomes initiative-scaling)

GA-97 (It's the resistance!)- 3

Kaydel Connix- 5 ( can someone explain how she's at all better than navigator?)

Korr Sella- 2

Larma D'Acy- 2

PZ-4C0- 4 (only that much because if c3p0)

Leia Organa- 15

3 minutes ago, gennataos said:

They're currently the only thing people see do well on MetaWing and adopt/emulate. They're the Rebel beef of Resistance in that they're easy to fly relative to other stuff in the faction because of the rotating arc. L'ulo is individually more of a linchpin than A-Wings as a whole, but there hasn't been a ton of experimentation with the bombers, falcons or half the T-70s.

I have tried most of the non-I5 T-70’s, all of the Resistance Falcons and most of the bombers. The lower I X-wings are just too expensive and the dial on the Resistance Falcon is awful. The red 4 forward and loss of the K turn hurt it sooo much. I there are a lot of interesting crew in the transport but they won’t do a whole lot of good if the rest of the faction is garbage.