6 hours ago, MasterShake2 said:

As it stands, this is just a "here's some advantages to things you may or may not know how to do" article and I feel like this is meant to be more instructional than that.

Independent of how good the articles on his blog are - they are the best in that direction and at least try to move the discussions away from the extremely boring list building. It is new territory I think he does a fantastic job.

If I were Bio your feedback would not be particularly helpful. Maybe you could instead write up and illustrate something yourself?

We as community need more written and illustrated content on approaches/tactics/methods instead of podcasts talking about list discussions and meta breakdowns. I don't understand why podcasts became the main form of communication for a game that is so incredibly visual.

Not being forced to move in formation is a concept many players fail or refuse to grasp.

Sometimes is for legitimate concern: one downside of approaching from different angles is that you are somewhat risking to not have all guns on the target on the first engage, other times is because you are playing with stuff like biggs or howlrunner and you are pretty much forced to stay in formation if you want to use the points spent on those ability.

More often than not thought, people play in formation out of habit and because they are afraid of manouvering.

Biggsless rebel beef was the perfect example of such behavior, I had great time in the mirror just because I wasn't scared of spreading up my ships and attack from 2 angles.

And I used to be one of those people always playing in formation, mostly because I always felt I was risking to not properly focusing fire otherwise.

Then, after losing countless games against the eventual winner of the Italian sos, I realized it was an overvalued fear and started to smash the mirrors (up until the point my ten numb managed to completely blank out 3 r1 with focus shots in a raw, but that is another sad story).

Ofc Bio's pictures are unrealistic example of games between decent players, but they are there to give you the idea of the concept, or at least I believe so

Please guy keep playing formation even when you don't need it

I could be well off the mark here, being a complete ignoramus on jousting formations, but is there a benefit to close boxes, defensively? Even if the list does not specifically require it.

I'm generally not a good fit into these archetypes, preferring funky, lower Init uniques on the whole. That does kind of make me more of an ace player though.

Anyway, given my propensity for very high mobility and unpredictability, I find it easier to coalesce from an unexpected direction on a single ship and mitigate return fire against dispersed formations. With good range control and obstacle usage ofc.

With boxes, clearly I can dodge the whole thing, but it tends to be much more of a gamble. If I don't get it quite right, they can often just turn, catch and delete one or more of my ships, since I'm having to point my arcs at their entire list, in a specific range band of them all, to get good shots. It's harder to disengage everyone or manoeuvre to isolate another of their pieces.

It does obviously highlight that dispersed formations are a lot trickier to get right.

This is mostly just off the top of my head but it was a thought.

Just to add another thought. It seems to me that flying a joust block that doesn't actually need to be a block is a way of gaining the defensive/positional benefit I mention above, before using their ability to split that block wide open after the 1st engagement and killbox something/everything to annihilation, following it.

These are generally my hardest games, so I feel it may be a bit of trap to believe that someone flying an apparently unnecessary box does not actually understand their reason for doing so, or that they will maintain that formation beyond its maximum efficiency.

10 hours ago, Transmogrifier said:

In my experience, the dial issues went out the window when struts got cut to 1 point - the dial shortcomings don't super matter when rocks are your friend.

“Dial issues”? The vulture dial can do everything it needs without banks. Blue two turn with broll—> focus is strong.

I was originally pissed when they were 2 agility, but at 3 agility it’s probably not fair.

Stream Game commentary is ok and really fun to listen to depending on the hosts but live streams are more hanging out with the community than the pursuit of highly strategic content. Its a challenge I think even for great players to provide analysis on a game as its happening. The best tactical content is typically Recorded Game Reviews with an emphasis on explaining options and general turn to turn strategy. Awhile back the Krayts recorded a video explaining Inert Han, pausing to John Madden telestrat options and explain what was going on or could/should be on peoples minds. They key is it was a game that already happened, wasn't being discussed live. I find this substantially more useful than the "micd up players talking in separate mics, or commentators live reviewing stream games". The key is that the games are reviewed after they happened with time for the commentators to think about what they are saying unless the commentary is from Tony Romo I guess. Classic Game Reviews are useful strategic content, but its time consuming and still tricky since it leads to having to explain very specific moments. Echo Base does some of this which is cool, but I think theres room for alot more of it. Doesnt even need to be "good" games even breaking down games where one player messed up terribly or the lists are mistmatched has value to newer players.

Itd be super fun to see some of that Krayt Patreon Kraytcoin invested in Krayt Redzone and Krayt Classic Games.

Could use some NFL Films Music to. Itd be great.

19 minutes ago, Boom Owl said:

tream Game commentary is ok and really fun to listen to depending on the hosts but live streams are more hanging out with the community than the pursuit of highly strategic content. Its a challenge I think even for great players to provide analysis on a game as its happening. The best tactical content is typically Recorded Game Reviews with an emphasis on explaining options and general turn to turn strategy. Awhile back the Krayts recorded a video explaining Inert Han, pausing to John Madden telestrat options and explain what was going on or could/should be on peoples minds. They key is it was a game that already happened, wasn't being discussed live. I find this substantially more useful than the "micd up players talking in separate mics, or commentators live reviewing stream games". The key is that the games are reviewed after they happened with time for the commentators to think about what they are saying unless the commentary is from Tony Romo I guess. Classic Game Reviews are useful strategic content, but its time consuming and still tricky since it leads to having to explain very specific moments. Echo Base does some of this which is cool, but I think theres room for alot more of it. Doesnt even need to be "good" games even breaking down games where one player messed up terribly or the lists are mistmatched has value to newer players.

I'm in on doing this. Locally the idea never took off... but I'm rather dry to listen to, and I'm not as analytical as many of the people here.

Heck - I'm up to handling some of the background stuff like prepping a video prior to people doing the breakdown. Speeding/cutting the dial spinning time, and such.

5 minutes ago, LagJanson said:

I'm in on doing this. Locally the idea never took off... but I'm rather dry to listen to, and I'm not as analytical as many of the people here.

Heck - I'm up to handling some of the background stuff like prepping a video prior to people doing the breakdown. Speeding/cutting the dial spinning time, and such.

32 minutes ago, Boom Owl said:

Stream Game commentary is ok and really fun to listen to depending on the hosts but live streams are more hanging out with the community than the pursuit of highly strategic content. Its a challenge I think even for great players to provide analysis on a game as its happening. The best tactical content is typically Recorded Game Reviews with an emphasis on explaining options and general turn to turn strategy. Awhile back the Krayts recorded a video explaining Inert Han, pausing to John Madden telestrat options and explain what was going on or could/should be on peoples minds. They key is it was a game that already happened, wasn't being discussed live. I find this substantially more useful than the "micd up players talking in separate mics, or commentators live reviewing stream games". The key is that the games are reviewed after they happened with time for the commentators to think about what they are saying unless the commentary is from Tony Romo I guess. Classic Game Reviews are useful strategic content, but its time consuming and still tricky since it leads to having to explain very specific moments. Echo Base does some of this which is cool, but I think theres room for alot more of it. Doesnt even need to be "good" games even breaking down games where one player messed up terribly or the lists are mistmatched has value to newer players.

Itd be super fun to see some of that Krayt Patreon Kraytcoin invested in Krayt Redzone and Krayt Classic Games.

Could use some NFL Films Music to. Itd be great.

Didn't we record a test episode of this (Calling it ThonkWing)?

2 minutes ago, Kaptin Krunch said:

Didn't we record a test episode of this (Calling it ThonkWing)?

We did... Is it dead?

3 hours ago, Cuz05 said:

I could be well off the mark here, being a complete ignoramus on jousting formations, but is there a benefit to close boxes, defensively? Even if the list does not specifically require it.

I'm generally not a good fit into these archetypes, preferring funky, lower Init uniques on the whole. That does kind of make me more of an ace player though.

Anyway, given my propensity for very high mobility and unpredictability, I find it easier to coalesce from an unexpected direction on a single ship and mitigate return fire against dispersed formations. With good range control and obstacle usage ofc.

With boxes, clearly I can dodge the whole thing, but it tends to be much more of a gamble. If I don't get it quite right, they can often just turn, catch and delete one or more of my ships, since I'm having to point my arcs at their entire list, in a specific range band of them all, to get good shots. It's harder to disengage everyone or manoeuvre to isolate another of their pieces.

It does obviously highlight that dispersed formations are a lot trickier to get right.

This is mostly just off the top of my head but it was a thought.

Just to add another thought. It seems to me that flying a joust block that doesn't actually need to be a block is a way of gaining the defensive/positional benefit I mention above, before using their ability to split that block wide open after the 1st engagement and killbox something/everything to annihilation, following it.

These are generally my hardest games, so I feel it may be a bit of trap to believe that someone flying an apparently unnecessary box does not actually understand their reason for doing so, or that they will maintain that formation beyond its maximum efficiency.

Close formations are useful defensively because all your ships are in one spot, so the turns before contact with the opposing squad, you aren't trying to coordinate differently positioned ships to get to the spot where you think the engagement will happen. There's no particular reason you need to stay in box formation, you can spread out to put, say, 2 arcs in 2 different directions and increase coverage, or one ship could jump out and block. It just makes it more likely on the turn that matters all your ships can contribute.

1 hour ago, Boom Owl said:

Stream Game commentary is ok and really fun to listen to depending on the hosts but live streams are more hanging out with the community than the pursuit of highly strategic content. Its a challenge I think even for great players to provide analysis on a game as its happening. The best tactical content is typically Recorded Game Reviews with an emphasis on explaining options and general turn to turn strategy. Awhile back the Krayts recorded a video explaining Inert Han, pausing to John Madden telestrat options and explain what was going on or could/should be on peoples minds. They key is it was a game that already happened, wasn't being discussed live. I find this substantially more useful than the "micd up players talking in separate mics, or commentators live reviewing stream games". The key is that the games are reviewed after they happened with time for the commentators to think about what they are saying unless the commentary is from Tony Romo I guess. Classic Game Reviews are useful strategic content, but its time consuming and still tricky since it leads to having to explain very specific moments. Echo Base does some of this which is cool, but I think theres room for alot more of it. Doesnt even need to be "good" games even breaking down games where one player messed up terribly or the lists are mistmatched has value to newer players.

Itd be super fun to see some of that Krayt Patreon Kraytcoin invested in Krayt Redzone and Krayt Classic Games.

Could use some NFL Films Music to. Itd be great.

Go pack go

23 minutes ago, Biophysical said:

Close formations are useful defensively because all your ships are in one spot, so the turns before contact with the opposing squad, you aren't trying to coordinate differently positioned ships to get to the spot where you think the engagement will happen. There's no particular reason you need to stay in box formation, you can spread out to put, say, 2 arcs in 2 different directions and increase coverage, or one ship could jump out and block. It just makes it more likely on the turn that matters all your ships can contribute.

There also isnt any particular reason that a spread out list cant get into a slightly closer group before the 1st engage happens to reduce some risk. There times it cant but thats up to the player. My favorite openings allow not just escape options but at least `1 turn ( typically turn 2 or 3 ) where I can opt back in to keeping all my ships at R2 of each other instead of R3 or beyond. Just in case someone is getting thonky and trying to carve out a partial joust and some good trades against something thats overextended. I can choose not to have that ship racing to a bad flank unsupported, although if i play to cautiously I might not be able to get to a flanking position that could pay off big time. The most rewarding moments and often the most difficult to do properly are the high speed early game moves to get to a set up spot. That doesnt strictly mean flanking. Often it means flying directly to a chosen part of your opponents killbox. This also 100% doesnt just apply to Ace lists. Its fundamental to flying 5 Striker + lists to which help drill these types of engagements the best in my opinion since AA allows you to adjust and also weirdly restricts your choices at the same time. Ace+ 5 Tie Fighters or Z95s is a great way to practice it to. You start to see why boost is an expensive action.

The cool thing about X-Wing is that your approach early, mid, and end game isnt 100% set in stone. You can vary speeds, barrel roll, or most importantly boost to change your strategy. The game is this interesting balance of more restrictive dials requiring better choices turn to turn and less restrictive dials with (Free K-Turns, Fully Blue Dials, No Stress Reposition, Rear Arcs, Premovement ) minimizing the consequences for dial failure.

7 minutes ago, Boom Owl said:

There also isnt any particular reason that a spread out list cant get into a slightly closer group before the 1st engage happens to reduce some risk. There times it cant but thats up to the player. My favorite openings allow not just escape options but at least `1 turn ( typically turn 2 or 3 ) where I can opt back in to keeping all my ships at R2 of each other instead of R3 or beyond. Just in case someone is getting thonky and trying to carve out a partial joust and some good trades against something thats overextended. I can choose not to have that ship racing to a bad flank unsupported, although if i play to cautiously I might not be able to get to a flanking position that could pay off big time. The most rewarding moments and often the most difficult to do properly are the high speed early game moves to get to a set up spot. That doesnt strictly mean flanking. Often it means flying directly to a chosen part of your opponents killbox. This also 100% doesnt just apply to Ace lists. Its fundamental to flying 5 Striker + lists to which help drill these types of engagements the best in my opinion since AA allows you to adjust and also weirdly restricts your choices at the same time. Ace+ 5 Tie Fighters or Z95s is a great way to practice it to. You start to see why boost is an expensive action.

The cool thing about X-Wing is that your approach early, mid, and end game isnt 100% set in stone. You can vary speeds, barrel roll, or most importantly boost to change your strategy. The game is this interesting balance of more restrictive dials requiring better choices turn to turn and less restrictive dials with (Free K-Turns, Fully Blue Dials, No Stress Reposition, Rear Arcs, Premovement ) minimizing the consequences for dial failure.

Definitely, and basically the faster/more maneuverable ships get more options. Gnwy can go from dispersed to close or close to dispersed in one turn, sometimes in multiple ways. It makes them harder to predict. The 4 Sabers + friend squad I ran for a couple months would often be midway between the two extremes, but could flex out or flex in at will depending on the situation.

13 minutes ago, Biophysical said:

Definitely, and basically the faster/more maneuverable ships get more options. Gnwy can go from dispersed to close or close to dispersed in one turn, sometimes in multiple ways. It makes them harder to predict. The 4 Sabers + friend squad I ran for a couple months would often be midway between the two extremes, but could flex out or flex in at will depending on the situation.

This gets to something I really like to do with non-conformed jouster lists. Deploying in a standard box and even advancing a turn remaining in formation can be reasonably effective in establishing that expectation for your opponent. I find people are so used to formation-flying joust boxes that once they see it for a turn or two, they plan around it. If you can break formation on or after a turn where your opponent has had to make a key commitment (around an obstacle or something), I find you can often squeeze out a bit of a positional advantage this way. The moment where your orderly box suddenly splits off to the four winds sometimes even gets a fun reaction from your opponent, too.

Don't get me wrong, sometimes this whole thing accomplishes nothing, and you shouldn't do it if you're sacrificing important positioning to get it, or if your opponent's deployment either won't care or can punish you for it. But there's something to offering your opponent a very clear understanding of how you are going to run your list, and then subverting it on them once they've locked into that.

Works especially well with ships that can reposition well or in unexpected ways (especially TIE Phantoms but probably also includes things like StarVipers, ships running Collision Detector, Aileron ships).

2 hours ago, Boom Owl said:

Stream Game commentary is ok and really fun to listen to depending on the hosts but live streams are more hanging out with the community than the pursuit of highly strategic content. Its a challenge I think even for great players to provide analysis on a game as its happening. The best tactical content is typically Recorded Game Reviews with an emphasis on explaining options and general turn to turn strategy. Awhile back the Krayts recorded a video explaining Inert Han, pausing to John Madden telestrat options and explain what was going on or could/should be on peoples minds. They key is it was a game that already happened, wasn't being discussed live. I find this substantially more useful than the "micd up players talking in separate mics, or commentators live reviewing stream games". The key is that the games are reviewed after they happened with time for the commentators to think about what they are saying unless the commentary is from Tony Romo I guess. Classic Game Reviews are useful strategic content, but its time consuming and still tricky since it leads to having to explain very specific moments. Echo Base does some of this which is cool, but I think theres room for alot more of it. Doesnt even need to be "good" games even breaking down games where one player messed up terribly or the lists are mistmatched has value to newer players.

Itd be super fun to see some of that Krayt Patreon Kraytcoin invested in Krayt Redzone and Krayt Classic Games.

good timing, we were doing another thursday but I went to bed instead

maybe today instead if I can stay awake

Just now, Brunas said:

maybe today instead if I can stay awake

I can ping you repeatedly until you start, if that helps. Heck, I can do it repeatedly anyway because it's fun to irritate people.

CONTENT.

Good posts gents. Much like.

Good spacing is something that has become more and more clear to me, the more I learn. Obviously goes hand in hand with your awareness of how the opposition squad can alter their own positions. To me, this is really the nuts and bolts of the game and therefore the most useful thing to actually think about, ahead of playing with a squad.

Pretty much the subject that is often called for and not much discussed, since the generalities are so hard to pin own and the specifics are inextricably tied to game state.

Personally, this is where my solo practice is focussed these days. I work out a deployment and then run through several turns of movement, noting where I have become too concentrated or too dispersed, checking ranges and seeing how I've limited my options leading into and out of those states.

I feel like this has been key in the improvements in my play recently. Interesting part for me is that actual squad building is largely irrelevant to this process. I'll fine tune that part after playing proper games, since the choices there are immaterial if I've fluffed my positional play.

17 minutes ago, Brunas said:

maybe today instead if I can stay awake

Just now, Boom Owl said:

I didn't think I'd get a cameo in a video game ever, but...

6 minutes ago, Brunas said:

I didn't think I'd get a cameo in a video game ever, but..

Context

"Personality

Hating constraints and loving his freedom, Linhardt does his best to avoid worries and problems, and indulges in lazing about. Contrary to what this may indicate at first, Linhardt is far from useless, as he offers precise observation and criticism to his classmates in several of his support conversations, but he is unwilling to utilize his skills in a practical manner.He has a genuine interest in Crests, and when he gets into his research he can forget to even eat or sleep. That, accompanied by his unparalleled intellect makes him one of the smartest students in his class. However, he often flutters from interests and is only able to focus on whatever fancies him in the moment. Despite their personalities and hobbies being different, he gets along well with Caspar."

3 hours ago, PaulRuddSays said:

I was originally pissed when they were 2 agility, but at 3 agility it’s probably not fair.

They could have been 3, but then they couldn’t have been so dang cheap. Also Struts would be abusive, for sure.

1 hour ago, catachanninja said:

Go pack go

Woooo!

Are they lining up to be pretty terrible again this year? I don’t actually pay attention to sports, and I don’t get any idea of how things are going secondhand since moving out of state

5 minutes ago, Boom Owl said:

He has a genuine interest in Crests, and when he gets into his research he can forget to even eat or sleep.

If there's one thing that's been pretty obvious from this thread, it's @Brunas's interest, nay, obsession with Crests. Can't get more than a page or two through the thread without Yet Another Crest Rant. Probably the worst part of the Carolina Krests Podcast too.

8 hours ago, GreenDragoon said:

Independent of how good the articles on his blog are - they are the best in that direction and at least try to move the discussions away from the extremely boring list building. It is new territory I think he does a fantastic job.

If I were Bio your feedback would not be particularly helpful. Maybe you could instead write up and illustrate something yourself?

We as community need more written and illustrated content on approaches/tactics/methods instead of podcasts talking about list discussions and meta breakdowns. I don't understand why podcasts became the main form of communication for a game that is so incredibly visual.

This deserves two likes.

@Brunas rule 63

2 hours ago, LagJanson said:

We did... Is it dead?

It seems in anger, your Canadian Internet killed it.

29 minutes ago, Kaptin Krunch said:

It seems in anger, your Canadian Internet killed it.

NnnOOO-----OOOO----oooOO------o!