1 hour ago, Jeff Wilder said:

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.

I agree with these.

First that announcing should be a rule. With a warning when a 3rd omission within a game is noted. And grounds for DQ when 2 games reach 3rd omission (perhaps at a 16 person and above level game where players are notably not new anymore).
It makes tournaments harder to prepare for, but its good practice that everyone will eventually benefit from.

Should one have to call out how many points were earned too?

--

Interestingly, reading the chart might take more comprehension than one might have in the moment. Though, ALSO a good call.

11 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.

I think I actually did that, but (FWIW), I had no idea which one was supposed to be which, so it wasn't intentional. And once I found out, I used the right paint-jobs. (My OCD would not allow otherwise, in any event.)

19 minutes ago, Tlfj200 said:

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

So playing the game as designed is "ethically" wrong, even if your intent and how you play is completely open....

OK.

To be clearer still, I was never judging anyone, just debating the "judgement" of players that simply utilize the game pieces as designed. So I'm doing the opposite? Plus, I was never, "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," as I did not and would not do such a thing. I do my absolute best to follow all of the rules (though I have failed plenty I admit) and I am an open book, to the point I always remind other players of missed possibilities/opportunities during games immediately when I see them, regardless on how it effects the game for or against me.

But hey, I get it. You and your cohorts are "better players" and certainly understand the "ethics" better than I do (no sarcasm here, I do understand some things are beyond novices like me).

It's actually good to learn these things, I'm one of the first to admit when I'm wrong and change. I'll attempt to differentiate my generics if and when I ever have any with differing upgrades, though now I only fly FO and it simply hasn't come into play.

...and, the tea is grand.

3 minutes ago, clanofwolves said:

So playing the game as designed is "ethically" wrong, even if your intent and how you play is completely open....

Yes, sometimes.

A gap or failure doesn't mean something is ethically right.

3 minutes ago, clanofwolves said:

But hey, I get it. You and your cohorts are "better players" and certainly understand the "ethics" better than I do (no sarcasm here, I do understand some things are beyond novices like me).

I'm not included. I'm noting how good players can win without the need for "gamemanship".

I use the quotations because so far, almost all discussions around the topic are thinly veiled discussions for "can I basically mislead my opponent on the gamestate?"

You might be able to, technically, but man, do you want to win that way?

5 minutes ago, clanofwolves said:

It's actually good to learn these things, I'm one of the first to admit when I'm wrong and change. I'll attempt to differentiate my generics if and when I ever have any with differing upgrades, though now I only fly FO and it simply hasn't come into play.

I mean, my tone is come back because of the sarcasm and the skepticism you showed.

Rather than curiosity, you acted like the only thing anyone can do is paint their ships, or use the (honestly, sorta bad/mediocre) numbering tokens FFG gave us.

Like, the real answer is many of us are actively trying to solve the issue of clear gamestates live. *I* don't paint. I don't even want to rely on painting as the issue - so I wholeheartedly agree that cannot be the answer/resolution. But I don't want to simply dismiss the issue as too hard, either.

7 minutes ago, clanofwolves said:

...and, the tea is grand.

I guess I was thinking about Brunas’ description when I said tricking. Seven stripey boi vultures all on a single peg is way different than this one on one peg has no struts, the brown ones have discords, and the two peg ones have struts.

One peg makes it harder to read numbers, random non-sequential numbers make it harder to track health, and slows the game down. All allowed, but I’d vote unsporting. Doesn’t mean you can’t or even shouldn’t, but when I see it there’s a little feels bad man.

To tie it back, no one will ever have to pause the game to ask “which ones have struts again?” if struts are 0, and then the balancing and squad building with Vultures just has to be one variable.

57 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.

That's a very specific scenario and kind of interesting to talk about.

Should a TO intervene, if a player is flying two ships with common-sense-reversed models? Does this rise to the level of intervention? Obi-wan for Anakin, Anakin for Obi-wan is one example; I've seen some Fang/Syck mods flown side by side that would raise my eyebrows too.

1 hour ago, GreenDragoon said:

I hate magnetized ships facing the wrong direction with the burning passion of a thousand suns.

As a player with some magnetized ships, it bugs me too but I don't have full control over the whims of magnetism and I don't want to fiddle with the ship (risking nudge/bumps of the ship or nearby components) to fix it.

I don't think I'd agree with "maybe we shouldn't allow magnetized ships" but I would probably consider it actually reasonable?

24 minutes ago, svelok said:

I don't think I'd agree with "maybe we shouldn't allow magnetized ships" but I would probably consider it actually reasonable?

I have the same stance on that as on swarms: the burden is on you to make it as clear as reasonably possible that they face roughly the right way. You have a range of 90°, that should be enough. Outside of that, please correct it on your next movement. I have only few magnetized ships and I try to make sure they are facing the right way. Same as I try to put my dials down faster than my opponent when playing a swarm.

I think you should feel obligated to keep the ships facing roughly the right way

e: I give intent way more weight than I maybe should. As long as you don't use it as extra edge, you'll probably want to correct it every now and then, anyway.

1 hour ago, clanofwolves said:

So playing the game as designed is "ethically" wrong, even if your intent and how you play is completely open....

You guys are talking past each other.

@Tlfj200 is talking about people who deliberately and consciously don't take steps to remove confusion from component identity. He's not talking about people who do it without thinking (that's just inconsiderate, it's not unethical).

But of course he's right, @clanofwolves. You can't possibly think that someone with eight ships on the board, each functionally different in a minor or major way, who thinks, "Yeah, figuring out which is which is that guy's problem" isn't being a jerk ... can you?

3 hours ago, GreenDragoon said:

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.

What is this called?

12 minutes ago, Transmogrifier said:

What is this called?

The game is called Jass, it's the most common card game around here.

The thing on the image is used to keep the score, a simple mini chalk board. The Z uses the lower line for 20, middle for 50, and upper for 100 points, and a game usually continues until a previously agreed upon number of points is scored. They are not usually that small, a ~6" length is more common. But obviously the people that brought you the pocket knife with hyper utility also invented a pocket Jass set to play on a hike. Or in the train. Or a restaurant. Or...

e: see here for example

https://jassverzeichnis.ch/index.php/component/phocacart/item/3-jass-sets/21-jass-box-schweizer-kreuz?gclid=CjwKCAiA44LzBRB-EiwA-jJipCxhYNpsU8RnbCt73OgCabYEG_d5ep5dFixk68a8twoktSbODdDrQBoCKkkQAvD_BwE

10 minutes ago, GreenDragoon said:

They are not usually that small, a ~6" length is more common.

C'mon, man ... !

And don't act innocent ... you actually had to translate that from metric to Stupid American.

Worlds and Primes should be hyperspace only.

2 hours ago, AEIllingworth said:

To tie it back, no one will ever have to pause the game to ask “which ones have struts again?” if struts are 0, and then the balancing and squad building with Vultures just has to be one variable.

This. So much this. configs that fundamentally alter how a ship can fly, like Pivot wing, S-foils, or struts should be free as a way to make that ship uniform. IMO, configs are just ship abilities that need to be able to flip (or be swapped, like the gunboat or jedi) and should always be baked into base cost (for at least the cheapest one, and then costed from there).

9 minutes ago, Boom Owl said:

Worlds and Primes should be hyperspace only.

Fort Hyperspace

3 minutes ago, Jeff Wilder said:

C'mon, man ... !

And don't act innocent ... you actually had to translate that from metric to Stupid American.

😇

The mini chalk boards would be such a low tech solution, and relatively cheap while super easy to use! The smallest ones are the size of a card and thus fit everywhere.

The material is traditionally slate, but there are also plastic ones with a special surface. The Z is just on one side. I'll give it a try, maybe on Saturday already

20 minutes ago, GreenDragoon said:

I'll give it a try, maybe on Saturday already

Let me know how it goes. I'm willing to give it a try.

26 minutes ago, Chumbalaya said:

Fort Hyperspace

1 hour ago, Boom Owl said:

Worlds and Primes should be hyperspace only.

Shots fired!!! Shots fired!!

4 hours ago, AEIllingworth said:

I guess I was thinking about Brunas’ description when I said tricking. Seven stripey boi vultures all on a single peg is way different than this one on one peg has no struts, the brown ones have discords, and the two peg ones have struts.

One peg makes it harder to read numbers, random non-sequential numbers make it harder to track health, and slows the game down. All allowed, but I’d vote unsporting. Doesn’t mean you can’t or even shouldn’t, but when I see it there’s a little feels bad man.

To tie it back, no one will ever have to pause the game to ask “which ones have struts again?” if struts are 0, and then the balancing and squad building with Vultures just has to be one variable.

I don't think it was unsporting - they were just super unprepared to play. Inconsiderate I'd say, but I think they just forgot a few pieces or whatever.

3 hours ago, Jeff Wilder said:

You guys are talking past each other.

@Tlfj200 is talking about people who deliberately and consciously don't take steps to remove confusion from component identity. He's not talking about people who do it without thinking (that's just inconsiderate, it's not unethical).

But of course he's right, @clanofwolves. You can't possibly think that someone with eight ships on the board, each functionally different in a minor or major way, who thinks, "Yeah, figuring out which is which is that guy's problem" isn't being a jerk ... can you?

same team

3 hours ago, Chumbalaya said:

Fort Hyperspace

My right to use defenders shall not be infringed 🤔

4 hours ago, Tsavong said:

My right to use defenders shall not be infringed 🤔

An adv. Sensor Defender + Palp is insane good in extended rn. Heck, an adv sensor marksmanship autoblaster Defender is a crazy powerful solo piece.

I'm not sold on Defenders with inits higher than 1 in the current extended running without a movement-based sensor upgrade/coordinate unless flown in a set of specific roles/styles. Being predictable or scared of getting blocked hurts in the early game. Flipping that dynamic on the opponent is bonkers. And with Empire's massively deep roster, there are always good wingmates to our favorite behemoths.

Another thing I don't get. I've been blessed to be able to travel across Europe over the last year, playing more X-Wing that I ever expected. I had exactly two games where I meet "unethical" players.

I keep reading about this convoluted arguments about wierd ways to cheat like its super common. Here we are 3 pages deep into an argument about labelling similar ships, yet I have never meet a person who didn't properly label and mark all their ships. At a tournament at least, locally we fly a bunch of testing lists and what not so everything is fine even proxying.

What I am trying to say is that if feels like people are proving their arguments by using ridiculous edge cases that almost never happen.

6 hours ago, Flurpy said:

Another thing I don't get. I've been blessed to be able to travel across Europe over the last year, playing more X-Wing that I ever expected. I had exactly two games where I meet "unethical" players.

I keep reading about this convoluted arguments about wierd ways to cheat like its super common. Here we are 3 pages deep into an argument about labelling similar ships, yet I have never meet a person who didn't properly label and mark all their ships. At a tournament at least, locally we fly a bunch of testing lists and what not so everything is fine even proxying.

What I am trying to say is that if feels like people are proving their arguments by using ridiculous edge cases that almost never happen.

I’m not sure which way you mean.

i agree that it actually almost never happens.

what I see more of is people arguing there’s no need, no burden, and the opponent just needs to ‘suck it up’ and it’s ‘public information’ in a very dismissive way, which is actually not how people tend to act (not should we, as a community, tolerate).

Basically, the edge cases have come out a bit more when things like swarms with weird or sporadic upgrades, which is still not really a common occurrence.

I just remember my first example was @catachanninja mentioning he sorta just ‘trusted’ CIS players to properly spend their charges and stuff because this droid had this, and that droid had that, and it was a headache, as an opponent, to even keep track of. He didn’t think his opponent was shady, or cheating, or anything, but it dawned on me that I didn’t want to be that opponent.

17 hours ago, svelok said:

That's a very specific scenario and kind of interesting to talk about.

NoVa open 2018 (very very end of 1.0). It was a 4-0 round, which meant the winner clinched day 2 and so stakes were highish but not make or break. Guy ran palp defenders, but ryad was gray and vessery was red. I commented on it, and he said "yeah I do it that way to confuse people." And something like "any advantage you can get, you know?"

It made me want to win even more, but i sort of understand? I don't do it, but I understand.

13 minutes ago, Ablazoned said:

NoVa open 2018 (very very end of 1.0). It was a 4-0 round, which meant the winner clinched day 2 and so stakes were highish but not make or break. Guy ran palp defenders, but ryad was gray and vessery was red. I commented on it, and he said "yeah I do it that way to confuse people." And something like "any advantage you can get, you know?"

It made me want to win even more, but i sort of understand? I don't do it, but I understand.

If I did that, then I think it’d more likely confuse me more than my opponent.