You guys are all way too smart for me, for I personally like the variants that 1 point struts give CIS players. Choices are good?

If you're running a swarm generics of anything and some have this and some have that or nothing, that's just the breaks. It's tough on the opponent to know ships marked 4, 5 and 6 have X and 1, 2 and 3 do not. But hey --being a guy nutty enough to have oddly played 4 generic TIE Bombers, 2 with missiles and two with bombs in 1.0-- and it was tough at times for me to keep straight the numbers on the bases so I could set up what I wanted.

Smart guys game this can be.

A good tea really assists...

1 hour ago, 5050Saint said:

I'm genuinely curious as to whether the "named" Vultures are sneaky good but no one knows because no one has a significant amount of reps with them. @theBitterFig price chart seems a good place to start.

I've tried all of them:

-311 is situationally useful.

-081 is comically useless. If free, I'd strongly consider still not taking it for list simplicity.

HCs are bizarre and bad. At best they're an unreliable engine for a couple extra dice mods in a faction with very reliable mod engines, and the limit of two means you can't bring a bunch of them to compensate for how unreliable the ability is (and even if you could its not a good enough ability to justify what that would cost.) Even if you brought them, they make all the same list and play decisions a normal Vulture would anyways. I don't know if I would pay one point for this, but if you would, all you get is a Vulture that sometimes spits out a bonus action on accident.

PHs are the closest to ok. Their ability works with ordnance which is a good trick, and bullseyes are common at range 1. They pair well with Sear, too. But they pay not only a 2pt ability tax (too much: who in their right mind would volunteer to pay for predator on vultures), but also a 2pt i3 tax, or in other words each PH is a discord missile or most of a drk1, and three PHs is the difference between O66 and Dooku or an entire torpedo. Nobody's running Separatist Drones so a Luxury Separatist Drone is too much an ask; but I'd be all over PHs if they were one point over a TFD so there's just a pricing issue.

I've suggested in the past that maybe the dotted Vultures should lose their config and gain a talent slot to carve out a more substantial niche. Right now, the lack of a niche is their shortcoming. The abilities, -311 aside, don't do anywhere near enough to make them not just a generic Vulture that occasionally accidentally gets bonus mods.

Contrast with the Hyenas, which while not all popular, have clear use cases and varied playstyles.

9 minutes ago, clanofwolves said:

You guys are all way too smart for me, for I personally like the variants that 1 point struts give CIS players. Choices are good?

If you're running a swarm generics of anything and some have this and some have that or nothing, that's just the breaks. It's tough on the opponent to know ships marked 4, 5 and 6 have X and 1, 2 and 3 do not. But hey --being a guy nutty enough to have oddly played 4 generic TIE Bombers, 2 with missiles and two with bombs in 1.0-- and it was tough at times for me to keep straight the numbers on the bases so I could set up what I wanted.

Smart guys game this can be.

A good tea really assists...

I can't tell how sarcastic you're being, but man, *I* don't want to win based on my opponent simply being confused on the board state.

Also, there's a real difference on 8 ship swarms and like, 4 ship variances, but even so, I just don't see the point in doing anything to try and obfuscate the boardstate.

I want to win because my opponent made poor strategic decisions under full knowledge, not because they simply forgot which droid was which out of the plethora of the ones I brought.

14 minutes ago, Tlfj200 said:

I can't tell how sarcastic you're being, but man, *I* don't want to win based on my opponent simply being confused on the board state.

Also, there's a real difference on 8 ship swarms and like, 4 ship variances, but even so, I just don't see the point in doing anything to try and obfuscate the boardstate.

I want to win because my opponent made poor strategic decisions under full knowledge, not because they simply forgot which droid was which out of the plethora of the ones I brought.

I won my way into one of my few cuts because my opponent forgot my b-wing had a hull upgrade and he hadn’t scored half yet. It felt really bad.

I’d rather be a 3-3 or 4-2 player in fun, cordial games than 5-1 by tricking people or “gamesmanship”. I think Travis has a similar mindset, just +1 win in each category and a podcast?

57 minutes ago, AEIllingworth said:

I won my way into one of my few cuts because my opponent forgot my b-wing had a hull upgrade and he hadn’t scored half yet. It felt really bad.

It does feel bad, and on both sides (as you noted).

Players should always announce when points are scored against their ships, and how many. (And, in the case of regen, when points are recovered.) This should be an actual rule, of course, given how important half-point scoring has become in nearly every game that's played, but it's somehow not.

That said, I tried an experiment across a couple of tournaments where I handed out slips to my opponents with my points, thresholds, and half-points on them. Not a single opponent made use of them -- most of them just looked at them, puzzled -- and yet every opponent asked me for the information at some point during the game.

1 hour ago, Tlfj200 said:

I can't tell how sarcastic you're being, but man, *I* don't want to win based on my opponent simply being confused on the board state.

Also, there's a real difference on 8 ship swarms and like, 4 ship variances, but even so, I just don't see the point in doing anything to try and obfuscate the boardstate.

I want to win because my opponent made poor strategic decisions under full knowledge, not because they simply forgot which droid was which out of the plethora of the ones I brought.

Not sarcastic, just not terribly smart 100% of the time.

Thing is, board state is objective and is always open to the players (Cards are on the table, and the ships are clearly marked, and players can inquire at any time), if they are wanting and willing to keep up with it. Obviously complexity comes with identical generic chassis having differing upgrades, but 'what is so unusual about that' is my leading point.

Second point to that is, it is not only paramount for the opponent keeping up with the board state of generic ship upgrades on the table, but oddly enough it is (funny enough) equally incumbent on the primary player.

1 hour ago, AEIllingworth said:

I won my way into one of my few cuts because my opponent forgot my b-wing had a hull upgrade and he hadn’t scored half yet. It felt really bad. I’d rather be a 3-3 or 4-2 player in fun, cordial games than 5-1 by tricking people or “gamesmanship”. I think Travis has a similar mindset, just +1 win in each category and a podcast?

So is having the same generic chassis carrying differing upgrades considered "tricking people" or "gamesmanship"? For the latter I agree, the former? No. That's simply part of the game.

23 minutes ago, Jeff Wilder said:

Players should always announce when points are scored against their ships, and how many. (And, in the case of regen, when points are recovered.) This should be an actual rule, of course, given how important half-point scoring has become in nearly every game that's played, but it's somehow not.

Did I ever tell you how much I agree with you?!

Unless I forget to check myself, I always inform my opponents of the current points, often several times during the game.

Unfortunately, that means I'm gimping myself at the moment. But I wish we had to at least do what you propose and announce all point changes.

My ideal world has the streamer type game clock plus current points on each table. Maybe a small whiteboard to keep track? I want to try that.

edit: Duh, looking for a solution when our national "sport" includes a small blackboard with a chalk pen and a sponge to clean it. Something like that is small enough and can be used all day.

23 minutes ago, clanofwolves said:

So is having the same generic chassis carrying differing upgrades considered "tricking people" or "gamesmanship"? For the latter I agree, the former? No. That's simply part of the game.

Having a bunch of stuff that trying to look the same, despite being different, and obfuscate the board is "tricking people" and not "gamesmanship".

It's not having the same ship with different upgrades - it's trying to not easily differentiate it, as well as actively confuse it.

Did I clear that up?

But I guess @pheaver is just poor at the game for actively using different colored vultures to denote discords and struts. What a scrub.

4 hours ago, theBitterFig said:

Also potential mixing of strut/nonstrut is bad.

Separate but...

There are a lot of ways to quote this out of context for fun, but they'll all get be banned.

F

2 minutes ago, Tlfj200 said:

But I guess @pheaver is just poor at the game for actively using different colored vultures to denote discords and struts. What a scrub.

Paul and Duncan both went out of their way to visually differentiate the different load-outs on their drones. I noticed it right away, and it really helped while watching the stream. It would be a nightmare (for me, at least) to not have that differentiation while playing.

My Discord Vultures are always my 2 old man tans and shiny boi.

3 minutes ago, RStan said:

My Discord Vultures are always my 2 old man tans and shiny boi.

Casual.

I always kind of don't like it when a pilot different than Poe is used for the Black One T-70.

My blue squadron recruit won't get a repaint because he has to be blue 🤷🏻‍♂️

Just now, GreenDragoon said:

My blue squadron recruit won't get a repaint because he has to be blue 🤷🏻‍♂️

At one point I only had one RZ-2 repainted, so I was unable to fly any more than one of Greer, L'ulo or Zizi at a time.

22 minutes ago, Tlfj200 said:

Having a bunch of stuff that trying to look the same, despite being different, and obfuscate the board is "tricking people" and not "gamesmanship".

It's not having the same ship with different upgrades - it's trying to not easily differentiate it, as well as actively confuse it.

Did I clear that up?

But I guess @pheaver is just poor at the game for actively using different colored vultures to denote discords and struts. What a scrub.

Clear, sure.

All the models do look the same from the factory, yet they also give these strange little chits with numbers on them, that differentiate them on the base of the stem and those said upgrades are face up on the table, yet you see upgrading different generic chassis without extra customized effort as "tricking people," when it clearly is not.

There is opinion, and their are the rules.

Did I also clear that up as well?

And painting your models is great and fun (I applaud such love), but it certainly doesn't indicate scrub or professional in any way. And, in the same way, utilizing the FFG models as designed and printed also does not define a player's intent or abilities in the game. I understand this extra effort and ability of those who paint their models assists all parties by visually simplifying the game-state, but it in no way should be deemed "right" and the use of the unaltered game materials as "wrong."

...ah, logic, like tea on a cloudy day.

2 minutes ago, clanofwolves said:

Clear, sure.

All the models do look the same from the factory, yet they also give these strange little chits with numbers on them, that differentiate them on the base of the stem and those said upgrades are face up on the table, yet you see upgrading different generic chassis without extra customized effort as "tricking people," when it clearly is not.

There is opinion, and their are the rules.

Did I also clear that up as well?

And painting your models is great and fun (I applaud such love), but it certainly doesn't indicate scrub or professional in any way. And, in the same way, utilizing the FFG models as designed and printed also does not define a player's intent or abilities in the game. I understand this extra effort and ability of those who paint their models assists all parties by visually simplifying the game-state, but it in no way should be deemed "right" and the use of the unaltered game materials as "wrong."

If only there were other ways, other than dinky little numbers... like different numbers of pegs, so different ship styles sat at different heights. Or little color stickers.

You know, anything to increase at-a-glance information, rather than slowing the game down and/or increasing the odds of confusion.

This is, once again, the argument of what's technically allowed, and what's ethically right and wrong.

5 minutes ago, clanofwolves said:

...ah, logic, like tea on a cloudy day.

So you can keep sipping on your tea, judging the better players for trying to invite other players to play the actual game, rather than trying to win via confusion, or weird rules tricks or dial/component failures, I guess?

I mean, it's allowed [sadly], but it doesn't mean it's right.

I think the principle is related to Jeff's wish that all point changes were announced, and my practice to always inform my opponent. The misconception is that it helps your opponent. Yeah, sure, it does. But above all it helps yourself!

So, now we have a situation where it is actually better for both when a player does it. Whether clearly indicating ships by other means than just numbers, or whether making the points explicit, all the same. It would be nice if the rules asked us to do that.

Just now, GreenDragoon said:

I think the principle is related to Jeff's wish that all point changes were announced, and my practice to always inform my opponent. The misconception is that it helps your opponent. Yeah, sure, it does. But above all it helps yourself!

So, now we have a situation where it is actually better for both when a player does it. Whether clearly indicating ships by other means than just numbers, or whether making the points explicit, all the same. It would be nice if the rules asked us to do that.

But what about the "gamesmanship" when you're accidentally winning!?

The only not-fun game I've ever played against vultures was when all the colors were random, discords were on "1, 4, and 5", and "2,4,5,6,7" have struts with no other kind of marking/indication as to what the **** was going on.

Actually the game was fun because my opponent was a cool dude, but trying to figure out what the **** was going on every turn was quite time consuming...

18 minutes ago, gennataos said:

I always kind of don't like it when a pilot different than Poe is used for the Black One T-70.

I know a guy who uses it with a rookie. Slam to block, take ion, then self-dmg to ionize enemy.

1 minute ago, Brunas said:

The only not-fun game I've ever played against vultures was when all the colors were random, discords were on "1, 4, and 5", and "2,4,5,6,7" have struts with no other kind of marking/indication as to what the **** was going on.

Actually the game was fun because my opponent was a cool dude, but trying to figure out what the **** was going on every turn was quite time consuming...

jUsT rEaD tHe nUmBeRs! iTs oPeN iNfOrMaTiOn!

y R u nOt hAvInG fUn!?

2 minutes ago, Tlfj200 said:

But what about the "gamesmanship" when you're accidentally winning!?

I've been in more gamesmanship discussions than I should have been...
I hate magnetized ships facing the wrong direction with the burning passion of a thousand suns. But it is apparently controversial when you do not want a hat, sunglasses and headphones to be the rational answer. And intent can't be known, so it apparently doesn't matter.

24 minutes ago, gennataos said:

I always kind of don't like it when a pilot different than Poe is used for the Black One T-70.

I'd get really tilted in 1.0 when people would swap carnor and soontir but play both, i see it occasionally with anakin and obi wan in 2.0 and it still pisses me off. I have no idea how id feel if someone had poe in thier list, and a different t70 with black one title equipped, i don't think there's a right answer for that one.

4 minutes ago, catachanninja said:

I'd get really tilted in 1.0 when people would swap carnor and soontir but play both, i see it occasionally with anakin and obi wan in 2.0 and it still pisses me off. I have no idea how id feel if someone had poe in thier list, and a different t70 with black one title equipped, i don't think there's a right answer for that one.

All Black One T-70s are Poe in my mind. You can bring as many Poes as you own Black One T-70s.