You guys can keep throwing propaganda posters at me all you want because the truth is that I fall for ALL of them, not none! I'm equally biased towards all factions!!!!

2 hours ago, GreenDragoon said:

By the way, was it with both new pilots?

Neither! But he will be bringing them in somehow.

I don't know 5A cost balance well enough to know how they fit, is it a feasible upgrade to the squad?

Both seem able to add durability, which could be a big thing. I've always felt that you're fighting for your life against them until you've at least got rid of one and sent another running, very preferably a name. Making that harder to accomplish in the 1st couple of engages can only be good for them.

1 minute ago, GreenDragoon said:

You guys can keep throwing propaganda posters at me all you want because the truth is that I fall for ALL of them, not none! I'm equally biased towards all factions!!!!

I know your weak spot.

14 minutes ago, Tlfj200 said:

I'm already convinced.

23 minutes ago, Brunas said:

Oh interesting, thanks. Also, this is something ATC should be able to do soon™, but until then we're stuck with spreadsheets.

Related question: It feels... not dishonest, but like it would be very easy to be someone who does a lot of stats collection, and then tells you how to feel about it. I know that I'm trying to be fair, but in an ideal world I'd want to provide it without commentary and just let people poke through it on their own. The problem is... I've seen what people do with raw data, and it certainly doesn't resemble anything that looks like analysis...

For example in this discussion, I'd like to be able to link these documents, give a few real/meaningful comparisons between the formats, and demonstrate that hyperspace is more "diverse" for my given definition of diverse. The problem is, I know how easy it would be to just doctor the definitions and thresholds for things to get whatever answer I want, so I don't trust it when other people give a huge amount of data, and knowing that no one will actually look at it, tell you the conclusions and how to feel.

What do?

Truth of the matter is that there is no objective truth/stat/rules interpretation that comes through the lense of a human.

You can embrace this ala msm and push your agenda

You can deny this ala msm/Dee and pretend to be an avatar of pure logic and objectivity

You can acknowledge it and write long thoughtful articles explaining your methods and have them be ignored.

Would peer review work in xwing? Forcing the proper use of scientific method and have checks from other biases might help?

2 minutes ago, jagsba said:

Truth of the matter is that there is no objective truth/stat/rules interpretation that comes through the lense of a human.

You can embrace this ala msm and push your agenda

You can deny this ala msm/Dee and pretend to be an avatar of pure logic and objectivity

You can acknowledge it and write long thoughtful articles explaining your methods and have them be ignored.

Would peer review work in xwing? Forcing the proper use of scientific method and have checks from other biases might help?

Isn't posting stuff on the forums peer review?

6 minutes ago, Cuz05 said:

Neither! But he will be bringing them in somehow.

I don't know 5A cost balance well enough to know how they fit, is it a feasible upgrade to the squad?

Both seem able to add durability, which could be a big thing. I've always felt that you're fighting for your life against them until you've at least got rid of one and sent another running, very preferably a name. Making that harder to accomplish in the 1st couple of engages can only be good for them.

In my opinion it's a strict upgrade for the list. You end up with 55421 but only 4 optics. Though, Tallie doesn't need one because she's i5 and won't use it as often.

47 minutes ago, Micanthropyre said:

Zizi Tlo (40)
Heroic (1)
Advanced Optics (4)

Ship total: 45 Half Points: 23 Threshold: 2

Greer Sonnel (36)
Heroic (1)
Advanced Optics (4)

Ship total: 41 Half Points: 21 Threshold: 2

Ronith Blario (34)
Heroic (1)
Advanced Optics (4)

Ship total: 39 Half Points: 20 Threshold: 2

Tallissan Lintra (36)
Heroic (1)

Ship total: 37 Half Points: 19 Threshold: 2

Blue Squadron Recruit (32)
Heroic (1)
Advanced Optics (4)

Ship total: 37 Half Points: 19 Threshold: 2


Total: 199

Aha! Ninja.

He had Tallie, Greer,3 generics, as much Heroptic as fits, I believe.

Yours worries a lot more, mainly for the added initiative, but also that added not-die-ness of Zizi. With L'ulo as the extra I5, i always felt I had a good start on reducing their numbers already.

I think this will seriously trouble the 4 Skull, and probably a lot of other things too.

Depending on dice

Just now, GreenDragoon said:

In my opinion it's a strict upgrade for the list. You end up with 55421 but only 4 optics. Though, Tallie doesn't need one because she's i5 and won't use it as often.

Yes! I have seen the light now ofc. I am concerned!

4 minutes ago, Biophysical said:

Isn't posting stuff on the forums peer review?

Ahhh, a man of science

4 minutes ago, Biophysical said:

Isn't posting stuff on the forums peer review?

Kind of? Depends on if people critically read it for feedback.

Man just figuring out metrics for statistical significance and banning farmer from using numbers would go a long way

14 minutes ago, GreenDragoon said:

You guys can keep throwing propaganda posters at me all you want because the truth is that I fall for ALL of them, not none! I'm equally biased towards all factions!!!!

same team

4 minutes ago, jagsba said:

Kind of? Depends on if people critically read it for feedback.

Man just figuring out metrics for statistical significance and banning farmer from using numbers would go a long way

I wonder if there's a useful statistical measure that statistical significance in X-wing could be expressed in. "Times this matters per game", and then we could argue about the definition of "matters".

19 minutes ago, GreenDragoon said:

You guys can keep throwing propaganda posters at me all you want because the truth is that I fall for ALL of them, not none! I'm equally biased towards all factions!!!!

We know the truth. Could you tell me your response to the following on this scale?

1. 5 Kihraxzes is no longer a legal list

2. 5 RZ-2As is no longer a legal list

17 minutes ago, jagsba said:

Truth of the matter is that there is no objective truth/stat/rules interpretation that comes through the lense of a human.

You can embrace this ala msm and push your agenda

You can deny this ala msm/Dee and pretend to be an avatar of pure logic and objectivity

You can acknowledge it and write long thoughtful articles explaining your methods and have them be ignored.

Would peer review work in xwing? Forcing the proper use of scientific method and have checks from other biases might help?

Off to go find an agenda I guess. Ace squad squad squad squad squad gang?

10 minutes ago, Biophysical said:

Isn't posting stuff on the forums peer review?

I mean, it actually could be. I posted an article at the dawn of 2.0 about how Hyperspace as a format would be beneficial to both the game and list diversity. People were still annoyed by the "but muh collection!" Thing, so very little productive feedback. However you're always going to encounter "noise" that has to be filtered, especially from those who are emotionally or financially invested in the contra opinion.

5 minutes ago, Cuz05 said:

Neither! But he will be bringing them in somehow.

I don't know 5A cost balance well enough to know how they fit, is it a feasible upgrade to the squad?

Both seem able to add durability, which could be a big thing. I've always felt that you're fighting for your life against them until you've at least got rid of one and sent another running, very preferably a name. Making that harder to accomplish in the 1st couple of engages can only be good for them.

Zizi takes optics, spends the focus for a damage, and then still has a defensive mod. Oh and is I5.

Ronith allows you to drop Optics from Tali because an unspent Tali focus still matters.

And @GreenDragoon I'm mostly tongue in cheek when I say lies, but I'm also incredibly wary of any statistics based argument that seems to tell me that I should feel a certain way about X-wing formats. I find this particular debate to be the absolute worst recurring one in the community: that one format is "superior" to another.

31 minutes ago, GreenDragoon said:

You guys can keep throwing propaganda posters at me all you want because the truth is that I fall for ALL of them, not none! I'm equally biased towards all factions!!!!

17 minutes ago, catachanninja said:

same team

Unironically and indirectly, me too.

Being Empire first player 1.0, I still complained and ran down the Imps far more than other two factions... to the point I joined Scum towards the end and love(d) my Kath/Bossk list best.

2.0 First Order I'm all in; still blast them verbally and wish to join other factions.

Grass is always greener is a disease; I have in spades, but I'm oddly happy. Their a poster for that?

26 minutes ago, jagsba said:

Truth of the matter is that there is no objective truth/stat/rules interpretation that comes through the lense of a human.

You can embrace this ala msm and push your agenda

You can deny this ala msm/Dee and pretend to be an avatar of pure logic and objectivity

You can acknowledge it and write long thoughtful articles explaining your methods and have them be ignored.

Would peer review work in xwing? Forcing the proper use of scientific method and have checks from other biases might help?

22 minutes ago, Biophysical said:

Isn't posting stuff on the forums peer review?

if you have to review a man, if you have to, is it somehow better if you do it clean with a like on the post? Is it somehow worse if you chop him up with a qoute? What if you have to review ten or a hundred or a thousand? What if it doing it you agree with a thousand or you acknowledge ten? What if you edit yourself? What is the measure of a man, or of his revision, by what insane calculus can we answer questions like this? Should we even try?

1 minute ago, catachanninja said:

if you have to review a man, if you have to, is it somehow better if you do it clean with a like on the post? Is it somehow worse if you chop him up with a qoute? What if you have to review ten or a hundred or a thousand? What if it doing it you correct a thousand or you spare ten? What if you edit yourself? What is the measure of a man, or of his revision, by what insane calculus can we answer questions like this? Should we even try?

Do you need a hug?

1 minute ago, MasterShake2 said:

Do you need a hug?

@Micanthropyre can explain better than me at this point. I tried really hard though

31 minutes ago, jagsba said:

Would peer review work in xwing? Forcing the proper use of scientific method and have checks from other biases might help?

I've been talking to @DoubleDown11 about an idea we had, maybe that's a good moment to pitch it.

It is actually some sort of peer review: a googledoc group where somebody writes a piece and people can opt in to comment, clarify and write indepth replies.

The idea stems from the feeling that blogging is really unsatisfactory because it should be a starting point when in effect it is perceived and understood as endpoint. But when I personally write about stuff, I want to have a discussion about it. I have sometimes too many and too strong opinions, I know that. But I enjoy reading thoughtful exchanges, so my motivations is rather to foster that.

Once the piece is rewritten with the new inputs, it would then be published.

The idea is that the group is open for everyone and that the requirements are enough of a filter.

14 minutes ago, Brunas said:

1. 5 Kihraxzes is no longer a legal list

Easy, a 5. Why did you only ask about one squad?!?!

10 minutes ago, Micanthropyre said:

but I'm also incredibly wary of any statistics based argument that seems to tell me that I should feel a certain way about X-wing formats.

That's perfectly fine. But if my opinion was based on something that's demonstrably wrong, or at least very ambiguous then I personally want to know that.

26 minutes ago, Cuz05 said:

Aha! Ninja.

He had Tallie, Greer,3 generics, as much Heroptic as fits, I believe.

Yours worries a lot more, mainly for the added initiative, but also that added not-die-ness of Zizi. With L'ulo as the extra I5, i always felt I had a good start on reducing their numbers already.

I think this will seriously trouble the 4 Skull, and probably a lot of other things too.

Depending on dice

So back in the day, I took Lulo but always felt the real cornerstone of the list was Greer and his excellent flexibility (rotate focus boost is really good, as is his ability to leverage the one-hard a lot more after a rotate).

5A is a razor's edge. A lot of my games were won on a very slim points margin, and I feel a critical component of my success was making sure to evaluate my victory options when there were 10 minutes left in the round and playing appropriately. And although you are usually winning by the slimmest of margins, the 5A player almost always has the agency, until they don't and then it's a hard climb.

New 5A is not as good as old 5A. Zari is a great piece and its lost Crack Shot, which helped maintain the edge.

16 minutes ago, Brunas said:

We know the truth. Could you tell me your response to the following on this scale?

1. 5 Kihraxzes is no longer a legal list

2. 5 RZ-2As is no longer a legal list

Off to go find an agenda I guess. Ace squad squad squad squad squad gang?

1. 0, cant type it much less pronounce it.

2. 8, but thats mostly just where I am because I'm furiously trying to build a Republic list that doesn't suck and when I fail 5A is my backup when I am 2 days from Adepticon and don't have a list.

6 minutes ago, catachanninja said:

@Micanthropyre can explain better than me at this point. I tried really hard though

Yes. He has unresolved emotions that he can't let out at work and therefore he's taking them out on the forums. I'm not explaining more because it'll just encourage him.

3 minutes ago, GreenDragoon said:

That's perfectly fine. But if my opinion was based on something that's demonstrably wrong, or at least very ambiguous then I personally want to know that.

I'd need to go back through your work (and I lost it in the thread, pm me a link and I'll look at it) but its more personal than that: I just really really hate the format superiority discussion because it makes me dislike people I normally like a lot.

13 minutes ago, MasterShake2 said:

I mean, it actually could be. I posted an article at the dawn of 2.0 about how Hyperspace as a format would be beneficial to both the game and list diversity. People were still annoyed by the "but muh collection!" Thing, so very little productive feedback. However you're always going to encounter "noise" that has to be filtered, especially from those who are emotionally or financially invested in the contra opinion.

The author failed to account for collection size in their paper.
Figure 1 did not present any meaningful data and was in fact a meme.
I'm beginning to think this paper is not in fact a scientific article, but rather an opinion piece, I recommend submitting to the Coruscant Times.

1 minute ago, Micanthropyre said:

So back in the day, I took Lulo but always felt the real cornerstone of the list was Greer and his excellent flexibility

Greer is female. Don't assume gender! (@RStan )

3 minutes ago, Micanthropyre said:

5A is a razor's edge. A lot of my games were won on a very slim points margin, and I feel a critical component of my success was making sure to evaluate my victory options when there were 10 minutes left in the round and playing appropriately. And although you are usually winning by the slimmest of margins, the 5A player almost always has the agency, until they don't and then it's a hard climb.

It's a weird razor, though. Like, it's not a "one mistake then dead" type list, more of a "oops, fell behind, how in the **** do I claw back"? thing.

4 minutes ago, Micanthropyre said:

I'd need to go back through your work (and I lost it in the thread, pm me a link and I'll look at it) but its more personal than that: I just really really hate the format superiority discussion because it makes me dislike people I normally like a lot.

Sorry, I did it again by implication after I said I'd drop it. My point was that if, hypothetically, my opinion was based on something wrong I would like to know. For example, if my opinion was that Extended is better because it allows me to fly RZ2s, then that would be wrong because they are legal in both. If I was saying Extended is better because it has larger diversity, then <I won't comment here without numbers>, that is at least somewhat answerable.

If your issue is with the whole idea that one format is better than another, then that's fair. But I think it's also fair to not only prefer one, but to state reasons for that preference. The jump from stating the reasons to arguing that those reasons make a format the better according to (ofc previously defined) criteria seems also ok? Hm.