17 minutes ago, ClassicalMoser said:

Second. I think I1-I2 generics are very very close to right at this point (exceptions exist). I think the bigger problem is with a lot of low-firepower I5-6 slipping through the cracks. Kylo, Zizi, Obi, Ric, Plo, Fett, Duchess, even Soontir. I don't think they need a giant nerf, but at least a little one would help. Then buff everything I3, and most of the named I4s (not the B-Wings). That probably evens things out enough.

I3 is bad garbage. I4 is currently okay-ish, with lots of well-played pilots out there (Silencers, Grievous, B-Wings, Jake, etc.)

Is is not weird to anyone that the two-talent I4 PAA is a point cheaper than the I1 no-talent Alpha Squadron Interceptor? The second-cheapest I4 generic in the game is the Saber Squadron Interceptor and it's six points more.

I'm not saying the Interceptors are necessarily priced correctly, but that's a pretty big deal. The full front-arc 3-primary surely isn't as good as a free turret, and autothrusters leaves you stressed...

Generally I don't like comparing prices based on what's meta as much as what's comparable and priced very differently. Probably because I care as much about what's bad as what's good.

Addendum:

So many people were terrified by the idea of allowing 6 TIE Interceptors on the board at all, for quite a long time. But those are completely blockable and at I1 they can be dodged by pretty much anyone, even with their autothrusters. They're locked into a forward arc, frequently stressed, and only have 3 health. The I1 doesn't even have a talent slot.

Now imagine 6 Saber Intercepters at I4, with crack shot. Would that be better or worse than the Nantexans? It's definitely a lot of 3-primaries, but also less time on target. Effectively blockable by I1-4 and easily dodgeable by I4-6.

I've always thought the Interceptor should have the extra talent but that's neither here nor there. At any rate it's ... odd to see how the community opinion shifts over the course of a year.

i made this exact same point. I don't know if 6 crack shot strikers would even be good. It's a 210 point list.

Just now, Kaptin Krunch said:

in short, it's not wierd, Generic Interceptors and Strikers were always crap.

That being said, they shoudn't be crap.

Ideally, nothing is crap. That being said, there's usually something that's bad (citation needed). Also, I seem to vaguely remember generic strikers being good at some point? Maybe with sloane it could work.

Patrol Leader (67)
Admiral Sloane (9)

Ship total: 76 Half Points: 38 Threshold: 8

Planetary Sentinel (31)
Ship total: 31 Half Points: 16 Threshold: 2

Planetary Sentinel (31)
Ship total: 31 Half Points: 16 Threshold: 2

Planetary Sentinel (31)
Ship total: 31 Half Points: 16 Threshold: 2

Planetary Sentinel (31)
Ship total: 31 Half Points: 16 Threshold: 2


Total: 200

View in Yet Another Squad Builder 2.0: https://raithos.github.io/?f=Galactic Empire&d=v8ZsZ200Z216XW14WWWWWWY213XWWY213XWWY213XWWY213XWW&sn=Unnamed Squadron&obs=

This took me about 90 seconds so it's probably total trash but it was more of a proof of concept than an actual list. You're 3 points of from fitting 5 sentinels with a sloane generic reaper, which hurts a bit. They could maybe stand to go down by a point or two on both generics, and quite possibly interceptors as well but I'm not sure what the "aaaaaa too many ships" breakpoints are for them.

3 minutes ago, Npmartian said:

Ideally, nothing is crap. That being said, there's usually something that's bad (citation needed). Also, I seem to vaguely remember generic strikers being good at some point? Maybe with sloane it could work.

Patrol Leader (67)
Admiral Sloane (9)

Ship total: 76 Half Points: 38 Threshold: 8

Planetary Sentinel (31)
Ship total: 31 Half Points: 16 Threshold: 2

Planetary Sentinel (31)
Ship total: 31 Half Points: 16 Threshold: 2

Planetary Sentinel (31)
Ship total: 31 Half Points: 16 Threshold: 2

Planetary Sentinel (31)
Ship total: 31 Half Points: 16 Threshold: 2


Total: 200

View in Yet Another Squad Builder 2.0: https://raithos.github.io/?f=Galactic Empire&d=v8ZsZ200Z216XW14WWWWWWY213XWWY213XWWY213XWWY213XWW&sn=Unnamed Squadron&obs=

This took me about 90 seconds so it's probably total trash but it was more of a proof of concept than an actual list. You're 3 points of from fitting 5 sentinels with a sloane generic reaper, which hurts a bit. They could maybe stand to go down by a point or two on both generics, and quite possibly interceptors as well but I'm not sure what the "aaaaaa too many ships" breakpoints are for them.

it's more "sloane is good".

The " vaguely remember generic strikers being good at some point? Maybe with sloane it could work." you are thinking of is me. At the very start of 2.0 I took them to the final of gold squadron classic because @brunas said that dropping in the finals to go home would be a bad idea since it was a charity tournament. 4 and a lambda and I really should have been flying 4 Juke Phantoms the entire time, it would have been a massacre.

Without Sloane no part of imperial generics works even slightly. It's my Backup-in-Event-Of-Having-To-Play-Extended list. Sai with Tractor and sloane, 4x crack scout. It needs a wide net on the engage with a token stacked striker (Via Sai) to prevent yourself from losing 2 in the initial engage- If that happens, you have probably lost.

That being said, we know that imp generics depend entirely on sloane for the viablilty of the list. Why would they balance the entire faction around Sloane? What they should do is nerf sloane and buff the generics.

Sloane should cost more. Strikers should cost less.

5 hours ago, Brunas said:

This is not how points work.

If you can add undercosted things to "balance" the squad, your squad is still bad, because you could have just filled it with undercosted things in the first place. I think we'll disagree strongly enough on the definition of viable squad to the point where this whole conversation is meaningless, but if you're willing to concede that some things are undercosted relative to others, I will assert that any squad that is not completely full of undercosted components is nonviable.

If a component/ship turns a squad from viable to nonviable, it is unplayable.

Dammit guys and gals, slow down, I missed this

Sure, I'm making some less than ideal choices in my building, but I like to challenge assumptions and do things a little differently, it's a choice.

It is how points are. Things float around the 'just right' mark. When something is a bit over, it doesn't suddenly shift to being rubbish, it just requires that little extra work and thought.

You'll struggle with a squad full of overcosted things, obviously. But you certainly don't need a full squad of undercosted things to be viable.

I maintain that you do not need The Best Things to have a viable squad. You need to know what you are doing, and what your opponent is doing. A player can and will get more value from their points, the more they understand their own coordination, know and anticipate their opponents capabilities and maintain a consistent level of concentration.

I simply believe that there is a lot more subtlety to manoeuvring your list than joust, flank, part joust, pincer, ace does this, beef does that, odds are this blah, blah and blah. Little things can punch high from unexpected positions. What looks like a mistake can be part of a 3 turn bait and so on. This subtlety is exactly why discussing in game decisions and tactics has always been so tricky and elusive.

I'll take a dip of 5-10% in raw efficiency, if it allows me some nuance and disguise in how I approach.

I'm fairly late to the game, having only played against adults out in the world since 2.0 was born. I consider myself average but have consistently achieved average to slightly above average results with ships and squads that are widely critiqued as being below average.

Not blowing my own trumpet, I just put an awful lot of thought into what I'm doing and find it makes a difference. Particularly when my opponent believes my squad looks sub par because it isn't wall to wall glory boys.

I have hits and misses but I have surprised a lot of people with my hits.

And we do have some world class players round here who seem to enjoy watching me fly.... I have a little bit of rep for being different and very difficult to predict 😎

Now ofc, I've had a go with meta things. I only really notice a decent step up when they're things everyone complains are well over the curve. Because obviously.

I'm still not interested in trying to make Z-95s do good things

edit: no wait, Bossk appeals, as does Nashtah Latts. But there are always other things in the way....

The Sabers are fine at 36 points. They are not at the Petranaki level, but are nice and I like them.

The problem is that is an almost useless option in a primary Aces faction (and enviroment). You can play them and have a good experience. I did it.

About blocking the Nantex, I think that is better not get too close and focus fire at medium range than risk one ship that probably die for one less token. I doubt that blocking is a good idea, although you play with a swarm.

18 minutes ago, Kaptin Krunch said:

it's more "sloane is good".

The " vaguely remember generic strikers being good at some point? Maybe with sloane it could work." you are thinking of is me. At the very start of 2.0 I took them to the final of gold squadron classic because @brunas said that dropping in the finals to go home would be a bad idea since it was a charity tournament. 4 and a lambda and I really should have been flying 4 Juke Phantoms the entire time, it would have been a massacre.

Without Sloane no part of imperial generics works even slightly. It's my Backup-in-Event-Of-Having-To-Play-Extended list. Sai with Tractor and sloane, 4x crack scout. It needs a wide net on the engage with a token stacked striker (Via Sai) to prevent yourself from losing 2 in the initial engage- If that happens, you have probably lost.

That being said, we know that imp generics depend entirely on sloane for the viablilty of the list. Why would they balance the entire faction around Sloane? What they should do is nerf sloane and buff the generics.

Sloane should cost more. Strikers should cost less.

I think that an interesting and related point here is whether swarms should always include some sort of force multiplier, be it Sloane, Howl, Dutch, Garven, Esege, Gavin, etc. Should 8 Academy Pilots just be able to go do things on their own and overwhelm people in bodies or should swarms have a lynchpin? At the moment, you can't really do the former-the efficiency doesn't quite work out. How do we fix that? I don't think points can. If Academy TIEs get cheaper, then 8x TIEs gets better but so does Sloane. Maybe those force multipliers need to be more expensive, but at the moment Sloane is really the only one that's actually viable.

2 hours ago, Brunas said:

This might be unintentionally start this thread's old favorite argument, but why the anger over nantexes here, but not say, Zari, who does the same thing (technically slightly better) as Nantexes?

Ship vs List, 6 vs 1, mostly.

Overall, X-Wing is balanced (for points, for fun) not around a single ship, but an entire list. Kinda have to mostly balance ships to balance lists, but it's possible for a few things to be less fun, or more powerful, if the whole list is "OK." Maybe I'll rip off Darkseid and propose an Antifun equation. Something like... [Unfun Level of A Mechanic] x [Quantity Of Mechanics] x [Win Rate]. That's a terrible equation, Jack Kirby and Grant Morrison would be ashamed. But mostly I just mean these things all factor in.

One strong and annoying pilot, if they're a small enough part of a list, and if the list has 55/45 or even a 60/40 matchup, well, I'll deal. The list isn't necessarily unfun, or isn't necessarily unfair, even if one pilot might be. Ace + Gang has never frustrated as much as Ace Ace Ace, for example. Part vs Whole, Ship vs List.

When it's a whole list of these kinds of mechanics, or one fat ship with every mechanic, and it's a 75/25 or higher matchup (IIRC someone onhere cited Dee about the Spamtex winrate apart from mirror matches being above 85%), there's a cumulative effect.

@Kaptin Krunch Looking at Dathomir:

Top 32:

• Total pilots: 138 (100%)
• I4 or less: 102 (73.9%)
• I5 or more: 36 (26.0%)
• Named I4 or less: 16 (11.6%)
• Total named pilots: 52 (36.9%)
• I4 or less percentage of named pilots: 30.7%
• I5 or more percentage of named pilots: 69.2%

Full field (minus two entries not on List Fortress):

• Total pilots: 660 (100%)
• I4 or less: 443 (67.1%)
• I5 or more: 222 (33.6%)
• Named I4 or less: 172 (26.0%)
• Total named pilots: 394 (59.7%)
• I4 or less percentage of named pilots: 43.6%
• I5 or more percentage of named pilots: 56.3%

Full disclosure, I didn't count a Nashtah Pup, and 2 Autopilot Drones were counted as named.

So PACEs were aces to 67.1% of the field. Of those I4 or lower pilots, 38.8% were named.

2 hours ago, Brunas said:

This might be unintentionally start this thread's old favorite argument, but why the anger over nantexes here, but not say, Zari, who does the same thing (technically slightly better) as Nantexes?

I kept hammering exactly this point on our 'cast, with Drew (and to a lesser extent Vince) trying to assert that the unblockability is why Nantexes are broken.

It's not. The sheer numbers one can bring, with good upgrades, is why Nantexes are broken. (I mean, when six ships are unblockable, that is a problem ... but the problem isn't the "execute maneuver" mechanic.)

(Unrelated, Paul, I started watching the video, and it's worth noting that the Nantex player is for some reason leaving 8 points unplayed.)

10 minutes ago, Bucknife said:

No. Do try to pick up the pacing and the jokes need to be improved

@Kaptin Krunch Looking at Corellia:

Top 32:

• Total pilots: 137 (100%)
• I4 or less: 110 (%)
• I5 or more: 27 (%)
• Named I4 or less: 26 (%)
• Total named pilots: 52 (%)
• I4 or less percentage of named pilots: 50%
• I5 or more percentage of named pilots: 50%

Full field (minus two entries not on List Fortress):

• Total pilots: 867 (100%)
• I4 or less: 608 (70.1%)
• I5 or more: 259 (29.8%)
• Named I4 or less: 206 (23.7%)
• Total named pilots: 465 (53.6%)
• I4 or less percentage of named pilots: 44.3%
• I5 or more percentage of named pilots: 55.6%

So PACEs were aces to 70.1% of the field. Of those I4 or lower pilots, 33.8% were named.

1 hour ago, LagJanson said:

No. Do try to pick up the pacing and the jokes need to be improved

4 hours ago, 5050Saint said:

Power level, yes, but also as @Npmartian said, they feel like they are playing a different game sometimes (in regards to slightly ignoring obstacles and bumps). 6 in a list at i4 is rough. 5 at i4 or 6 at i3 would be much more managable. i3 give many more options to init-kill them. So, yeah, power level and the lack of "fully execute" seem to be the largest parts of the equation.

5 hours ago, theBitterFig said:

C'mon.

Being blocked and moving and arc dodging and getting shots *IS SERIOUSLY NEXT LEVEL* over passive mods.

Sure, do what you can do deal with it, but don't pretend like this isn't a whole extra step of capacity from the Nantex, and challenge to the opponent.

I just now looked at Corelia results and realized that TWO advanced sensors DWYWM Iggy lists made cut and NONE of y'all angry that they can just dial casual over swarms.

1 hour ago, jagsba said:

I just now looked at Corelia results and realized that TWO advanced sensors DWYWM Iggy lists made cut and NONE of y'all angry that they can just dial casual over swarms.

Mainly because I'm rooting for them in Concord Dawn.

3 hours ago, jagsba said:

I just now looked at Corelia results and realized that TWO advanced sensors DWYWM Iggy lists made cut and NONE of y'all angry that they can just dial casual over swarms.

I'm only going to say this once:

LEAVE.

THE BOTS.

ALONE.

8 hours ago, ClassicalMoser said:

I think I1-I2 generics are very very close to right at this point (exceptions exist). I think the bigger problem is with a lot of low-firepower I5-6 slipping through the cracks. Kylo, Zizi, Obi, Ric, Plo, Fett, Duchess, even Soontir. I don't think they need a giant nerf, but at least a little one would help. Then buff everything I3, and most of the named I4s (not the B-Wings). That probably evens things out enough.

Sound like a plan.

I think certain chassis will/should have extraordinarily tight range of points between most pilots (T65 minus Luke), and other will have wider gaps based on linked actions and dials (Interceptors, Fangs, etc).

Finally, tweaks to ordinance and other upgrades.

Overall, this game is so balanced and amazing.

Things are going to continue to contract and ebb with new ship releases and upgrades.

5 hours ago, jagsba said:

I just now looked at Corelia results and realized that TWO advanced sensors DWYWM Iggy lists made cut and NONE of y'all angry that they can just dial casual over swarms.

I said it before. The balance between the best Aces and the rest of the field, can be solved removing some upgrade slots. I don't see Soontir naked as a problem. The Force pilots are more complex, because the free mods, but except those can be very tanky with evade + force available, they are well costed at this moment.

I think the game is better when each shoot counts. Mods like Stealth Device or Shield/Hull upgrades are very strong in some pilots because they work as a force multiplier.

In the other hand I think the generics of lower Initiative received a notable push in January but the 2-4 Initiative ones are forgotten until today (with the Nantex exception). The scalable points on Initiative are not ok in a lot of ships and some are beyond the curve.

I don't understand why the Epsilon costs 25 points while the Academy Pilot is 22. Also, why I pay one point more for an Obsidian? Without talent slot, the benefits (shoot before) and the loses (can't block all enemies) don't justifies the different cost.

Drop the cost of this next tier of generic pilots without talent allow more competitive price for the others and a more diverse meta.

Some final thoughts: If all elements of the game are well balanced (if that would be possible) what is the reason to use the squad builder? What is the criteria to balance things? A single pilot/ship or the possible squads and combos? The average skill of players or the best hands?

Maybe the best that we can do is play the game as it is and enjoy the changes until the next ones.

1 hour ago, S4ul0 said:

What is the criteria to balance things? A single pilot/ship or the possible squads and combos? The average skill of players or the best hands?

I think the criteria they use is the right way to go. There are too many elements to compare across the whole spectrum without analysing high level performance.

So basically, if it's overly fashionable, nerf it a bit. If nobody uses it, buff it a little.

Problematic part is that SO many people will just take the thing everyone says is best and avoid the things they're told are bad, rather than thinking for themselves, it can skew the picture.

Suddenly, the OK thing nobody was using, is now amazing.

It's inevitably an ongoing process that will never arrive at a destination. As long as the road isn't too bumpy, it can be a fun ride.

Thought experiment:

If Finn lost crew and gained gunner, Rey gunner would better than the current Copilot + Optics.

Opens dial and actions, not blockable by I1 Silencer, and open slots if you want more options. For a base few points more, that seems good.

3 hours ago, S4ul0 said:

I said it before. The balance between the best Aces and the rest of the field, can be solved removing some upgrade slots. I don't see Soontir naked as a problem. The Force pilots are more complex, because the free mods, but except those can be very tanky with evade + force available, they are well costed at this moment.

I think the game is better when each shoot counts. Mods like Stealth Device or Shield/Hull upgrades are very strong in some pilots because they work as a force multiplier.

In the other hand I think the generics of lower Initiative received a notable push in January but the 2-4 Initiative ones are forgotten until today (with the Nantex exception). The scalable points on Initiative are not ok in a lot of ships and some are beyond the curve.

I don't understand why the Epsilon costs 25 points while the Academy Pilot is 22. Also, why I pay one point more for an Obsidian? Without talent slot, the benefits (shoot before) and the loses (can't block all enemies) don't justifies the different cost.

Drop the cost of this next tier of generic pilots without talent allow more competitive price for the others and a more diverse meta.

Some final thoughts: If all elements of the game are well balanced (if that would be possible) what is the reason to use the squad builder? What is the criteria to balance things? A single pilot/ship or the possible squads and combos? The average skill of players or the best hands?

Maybe the best that we can do is play the game as it is and enjoy the changes until the next ones.

AKA, why Soontir has been undercosted and why Whisper and Boba are still really good.

12 hours ago, DR4CO said:

I'm only going to say this once:

LEAVE.

THE BOTS.

ALONE.

Bots are fine advS is band 👌

20 hours ago, jagsba said:

I just now looked at Corelia results and realized that TWO advanced sensors DWYWM Iggy lists made cut and NONE of y'all angry that they can just dial casual over swarms.

They're paying 16 extra points for unblockablility and there is only two of them. That mitigates it quite a bit.

Also, I was that 2 IG + Nom that went 6-0. I might be biased.

On 9/11/2020 at 10:52 AM, pheaver said:

Chumby, you could look at Oli's game vs them, where he played Dash Jake Wedge and beat them. I liked how he played, and his commentary shows his thinking of how to play against them. It was only an hour or so long, so a pretty easy watch.

As for the Nantexes, I think I'm in agreement with everyone else that they (and crack shot) are a little underpriced. I wonder how 6 naked i4s would do against the standard triple ace list. I think it'd be a fair fight.

But yes, the level of bullying that happens since they get to absolutely CRUSH anything lower init than them is pretty terrifying. I was super happy with my Sabine + 4 wookiee list, but I can't do better than a 200-100 loss vs the Nantexes right now. If they didn't have crack and a reroll, I think I'd be more confident in it being a game.

A bit late but thanks X-Wing dad.