12 minutes ago, Boom Owl said:

TROO! SAME TEAM!

Just meet me in the middle, that's all I'm asking.

1 hour ago, Boom Owl said:

I was talking to future you not today you.
Thursday you. The you that will be mad about the vulture nerf.

I'm already mad at the vulture nerf. I'm preemptively mad at the vulture nerf. Present me is future me already

19 minutes ago, jagsba said:

I'm already mad at the vulture nerf. I'm preemptively mad at the vulture nerf. Present me is future me already

I'm assuming I'll need this in 3 days

On 7/25/2017 at 1:53 AM, GreenDragoon said:

This will become the longest thread with the most interesting content on all forums.

I guess this isn’t mutually exclusive with pre-salted takes. Can we not just wait until Thursday to be outraged?

15 minutes ago, PaulRuddSays said:

I guess this isn’t mutually exclusive with pre-salted takes. Can we not just wait until Thursday to be outraged?

I'm outraged you'd even say that.

19 hours ago, GreenDragoon said:

If we're doing ATC feature requests @Brunas: I have one that's more questionable.

The upgrades tab tells us how good a certain upgrade is. But missing is the option of no upgrade in that slot. It might make everything very ugly and I don't have a good solution for you. Would "[None] - Modification" etc for all upgrades that have a slot be an option?

E.g. Vader has 442 squads, and 375 used afterburners, 3 used something else. That leaves 64 and I would like to know whether those 64 did better than afterburners. Same with sensors, where just 34 didn't take any, or the 271 without a force power.

(e: you can of course put the answer together: if the overall win % is 52.85 and afterburners has 50.85, then not-afterburners is better. But it is more complicated for sensors, and I'm quite sure it's easier to add it as row than to guess/calculate it based on all the given numbers)

Yeah. It's "hard" based on how I'm storing upgrades in the database. Not impossible or technically difficult, but lots of ways to accidentally break. Also, including them in the main upgrade list seems weird, to say the least. The 4th most common upgrade is... an empty talent slot? But without including them in that page, you can't compare for example all talents to no talents.

How much would you spend on Intensity, if it was brought into 2e essentially unchanged?

Personally, I'm anti-Intensity in 2e. I think it was reasonable and healthy action economy mostly only by comparison to nutty 1e action economy. Granted, it was more of an action time-machine than action economy, but still.

Anyhow, Poll.

https://strawpoll.com/c7ah761b

Intensity Y-Wings for the win.

Sorta kidding, but I'd love a talent that gave weaker ships a small advantage like this.

The problem is that the value of that token is decidedly higher for 3At+3Ag platforms.

How do conditionally cost something so flexible?

2 points per each native Attack/defense dice available?

...that'd be 6 pts for a Y-Wing, but 12 for a 3-3 platform.

err...

I'd play it at maybe 4 pts on a Y wing, but I digress.

____

edit: I'd like to see it available to Falcon and YT24 as well... So removing the "small ship" condition, but the whole idea of Intensity reeks of power creep.

Regardless of points... wouldn't a card like this undermine the purity of "low-mods-hard-choices" 2e?

3 hours ago, PaulRuddSays said:

I guess this isn’t mutually exclusive with pre-salted takes. Can we not just wait until Thursday to be outraged?

I'm set up emotionally for the worst case scenario. I cannot be disappointed (famous last words), so whatever they do will be a pleasant surprise from what I was expecting. Unlike you dial covers who are going to be furious that ____ is X points now.

57 minutes ago, jagsba said:

I'm set up emotionally for the worst case scenario.

I'm... Sorta expecting a Force nerf changing how force charges are recovered.

So, maybe I'll be disappointed?

*Fingers crossed*

1 minute ago, Bucknife said:

I'm... Sorta expecting a Force nerf changing how force charges are recovered.

So, maybe I'll be disappointed?

*Fingers crossed*

Expect it. But it makes force better

17 minutes ago, jagsba said:

Expect it. But it makes force better

And Soontir goes down 5 points.

#ImperialBias

5 hours ago, PaulRuddSays said:

I guess this isn’t mutually exclusive with pre-salted takes. Can we not just wait until Thursday to be outraged?

Ah I didn't remember that I edited that post back in March for future jokes. I was so confused for a moment!

3 hours ago, theBitterFig said:

How much would you spend on Intensity, if it was brought into 2e essentially unchanged?

Personally, I'm anti-Intensity in 2e. I think it was reasonable and healthy action economy mostly only by comparison to nutty 1e action economy. Granted, it was more of an action time-machine than action economy, but still.

Anyhow, Poll.

https://strawpoll.com/c7ah761b

Up to 6 points. Things that I like that would become extremely busted for it:

TIE Bombers for double mod torp alpha. Jendon free.

TIE Defenders for maintaining full defensive mods when repositioning as opposed to resting on getting out of dodge, using Juke, or Lone Wolf. Palp free. Trivially recharged, especially with the white 4k or when more appetizing things are in the enemy arc to shoot.

Interceptors and Silencers. In trouble? Just easy token stack, and once you get out, spend next round's token to recharge. A similar, but not as strong, argument can be made for Fang Fighters.

TIE/SF, invalidating any reason to take Fanatical outside holding on to lean builds, making any mirror match where they have the toy and you don't sheer agony.

E Wings...wait. This is actually good and potentially healthy for them! Oh, but too bad that the 2e of this card is tech + talent + faction locked! lol. Sure, most factions can't have it either, but the Empire's ship that is lock heavy but leaves the 3 green dice dry has a 3 charge force user, Palpatine, and an affordable use of Composure Afterburners. The card should be E Wing locked, but oh well.

Haha @svelok you're on a roll.

The answer to all four is: it would lead towards a more balanced game, but the way there might suck more.

Take intensity: fun to give low-mid initiative ships some extra to compete with the more OP stuff. But not actually healthy for the game.

27 minutes ago, GreenDragoon said:

Haha @svelok you're on a roll.

every forwards-looking thread makes me sad right now

5 hours ago, Hoarder of Garlic Bread said:

[2e Intensity]

TIE Bombers for double mod torp alpha.

Roll/Boost -> Lock really gets nutty with Intensity, doesn't it?

9 hours ago, theBitterFig said:

How much would you spend on Intensity, if it was brought into 2e essentially unchanged?

I know you said unchanged, but I think it could be interesting to make it charged based, say 2, and instead it is along the lines of after you perform a boost/barrel roll you may spend a charge to perform a red focus or evade action.

But I also have never made any kind of game so who knows.

8 hours ago, jagsba said:

Unlike you dial covers who are going to be furious that ____ is X points now.

This is great.

Force pools regen to full at the end of every turn, not just recover one.

Might as well lean into it at this point.

14 hours ago, PaulRuddSays said:

I guess this isn’t mutually exclusive with pre-salted takes. Can we not just wait until Thursday to be outraged?

I find your lack of outrage outrageous

12 hours ago, theBitterFig said:

Intensity-chan is my waifu

3 hours ago, gennataos said:

12 hours ago, jagsba said:

Unlike you dial covers who are going to be furious that ____ is X points now.

This is great.

Hey, Dial Covers are people, too.

3 hours ago, Tsavong said:

But I also have never made any kind of game so who knows.

Ever work in Retail or Food Service and have those super-annoying and ridiculous customers?

Oh, yes.

You've made games before.