1 hour ago, Tlfj200 said:

I'm going to be honest - I think the bulk of players hate swarms (when they're good). When swarms are good/competitive, they block opposing lists and get mods/have cool abilities (inferno, vultures, and now, nantex).

I understand there are players that like swarms, but let's be real - it's a much smaller minority than everyone else, and we'll still play the game if swarms didn't exist or squad sizes were capped at 5 (arbitrary number).

****, the FOcho wasn't actually even good, and people really didn't like it. (it really wasn't good).

As someone who has played a ton of 3 ship aces (especially in 2.0 since its always decent against everything besides the lost bid archetype mirror) and enjoyed such lists (moving last, not taking much damage, and deleting **** is fun) I 100% understand the "swarms are the enemy mentality". I know where it comes from. I disagree with it, I don't like it, but I accept it and genuinely understand it.

That said, I think there should be room to say that X-Wing is a "better" game when played at higher average ship counts (4.5-5.5) and lower upgrade investment (i.e. Hyperspace) without getting shouted down as being an irrational fake news enemy of ace freedom. This should not be a controversial thing to say or something that makes people angry to read. And boy do they get mad about reading "hey is Soontir undercosted?"

To your point though, swarms are such a wildly unpopular archetype ( both in terms of % of field and % of Sad vs Bad feelings ) that I can only die on that hill for so long. If the people overwhelming want to play endless Dash vs Vader or Boba vs Rey or Mango vs Obi their opinion is no less valid. If Swarms are relegated to B-Tier so they still "exist" but not as competitively relevant lists that might make the maximum # of X-Wing players happy? Maybe thats the ideal timeline? They see maybe 1 or 0 Swarms per Swiss, get to have the protagonist sugar rush and tell their friends about it, then move on to seeing whether or not they won the initiative roll in the rest of their games.

The trouble with Ace v Ace metas is it largely boils down to who moves last. Always has, even across formats. Good swarms are necessary to add some amount of unique flavor back to the 2.0 gameplay loop. I care more about tactical variety than I do archetype or list variety. If a Meta is 70% Aces ( Big Orange 2-4 Ships definition of Aces not strictly Double Repo and takes damage Definition) I genuinely view that as "mostly the same archetype" and I always will, no one can convince me not to. Empire Aces and Republic Aces are the same thing. **** Boba+1 is fundamentally the same as Oli's list in terms of what it does. Even Vader Soontir +2 or Ani Obi + 2 are fundamentally the same archetype. Turrets, control, and bombs can mix that up a bit but we have been repeatedly down that particular path in 1.0 with pretty bad gameplay results. Only when you begin to mix 5-8 ships relevantly into the competitive game do you start to see genuine tactical variety. From both the Ace players reacting to the questions the Swarm asks them in game, and the Swarm players wrestling with how to fight the aces, and the Ace + Swarm lists playing both sides.

I just wish there was room for a middle ground where CIS Swarm, Sinker Swarm, Drea Swarm, Howl Swarm, Syck Swarm, and Focho were not banished to the shadow realm for being relevant.

I also wish more players were vocal about the necessity of Swarms being relevant for 2.0 to be a healthy gameplay experience. That doesn't mean Aces would be unplayable or Low Ship counts would be unplayable either. We need good Swarms for the same reason nature needs Sharks and Wolves.

First Dad, then the crazy uncle, now we got the landlord knocking on the door and telling us to keep it down. Wow.

13 minutes ago, RebelProfundity said:

No. Absolutely, unequivocally no. That's based on playing the game since before TLT in 1.0. Any time a list or even a chassis in general is very successful there will be books written on the forums about how it destroys all agency and goes against the very core design intentions of the game.

Anyone who thinks 5A is considered OK isn't consuming much community generated media. There were a LOT of people crying when they weren't hit in the last point changes. GSP included.

Nope, as it has always been, "NPE" is simply a community approved way of crying about losing. That would be why FFG waits to see results from actual tournaments before dropping nerf hammers for the community. They can't trust the nonsensical noise that accompanies literally every effective list.

I'll also add that there has never, ever been a list/card/mechanic that has not had its defenders. Literally every nasty thing that has ever come out has had vocal supporters that would say "Git Gud, Tech against it, it won't beat "X", it's not as bad as "x", you're just overreacting, quit whining, etc."

You were supposed to destroy the thread not bring balance to it!

Matt, sorry you had to keep this in line. We are all a bit pent up with lockdown etc. But lets seriously take it down a notch. We are all friends in the end.

4 minutes ago, Boom Owl said:

As someone who has played a ton of 3 ship aces (especially in 2.0 since its always decent against everything besides the archetype mirror) and enjoyed such lists (moving last, not taking much damage, and deleting **** is fun) I 100% understand the "swarms are the enemy mentality". I know where it comes from. I disagree with it, I don't like it, but I accept it and genuinely understand it.

That said, I think there should be room to say that X-Wing is a "better" game when played at higher average ship counts (4.5-5.5) and lower upgrade investment (i.e. Hyperspace) without getting shouted down as being an irrational fake news enemy of ace freedom. This should not be a controversial thing to say or something that makes people angry to read. And boy do they get mad about reading "hey is Soontir undercosted?"

To your point though, swarms are such a wildly unpopular archetype ( both in terms of % of field and % of Sad vs Bad feelings ) that I can only die on that hill for so long. If the people overwhelming want to play endless Dash vs Vader or Boba vs Rey or Mango vs Obi their opinion is no less valid. If Swarms are relegated to B-Tier so they still "exist" but not as competitively relevant lists that might make the maximum # of X-Wing players happy? Maybe thats the ideal timeline? They see maybe 1 or 0 Swarms per Swiss, get to have the protagonist sugar rush and tell their friends about it, then move on to seeing whether or not they won the initiative roll in the rest of their games.

The trouble with Ace v Ace metas is it largely boils down to who moves last. Always has, even across formats. Good swarms are necessary to add some amount of unique flavor back to the 2.0 gameplay loop. I care more about tactical variety than I do archetype or list variety. If a Meta is 70% Aces ( Big Orange 2-4 Ships definition of Aces not Double Repo Definition) I genuinely view that as "mostly the same archetype" and I always will, no one can convince me not to. Empire Aces and Republic Aces are the same thing. **** Boba+1 is fundamentally the same as Oli's list in terms of what it does. Even Vader Soontir +2 or Ani Obi + 2 are fundamentally the same archetype. Turrets, control, and bombs can mix that up a bit but we have been repeatedly down that particular path in 1.0 with pretty bad gameplay results. Only when you begin to mix 5-8 ships relevantly into the competitive game do you start to see genuine tactical variety.

I just wish there was room for a middle ground where CIS Swarm, Sinker Swarm, Drea Swarm, Howl Swarm, Syck Swarm, and Focho were not banished to the shadow realm for being relevant.

I also wish more players were vocal about the necessity of Swarms being relevant for 2.0 to be a healthy gameplay experience. That doesn't mean Aces would be unplayable or Low Ship counts would be unplayable either. We need good Swarms for the same reason nature needs Sharks and Wolves.

Have not agreed more with anything on these forums in a while.

1 minute ago, Timathius said:

Matt, sorry you had to keep this in line. We are all a bit pent up with lockdown etc. But lets seriously take it down a notch. We are all friends in the end.

Same Team. Maintain Craig energy.

58 minutes ago, Chumbalaya said:

6, much like 7 and 8, is a devil number. 5 is only ok because of 5A. Unless a list is 75% names it is the devil. NPCs aren't allowed to win, they just exist to make my heroes look like heroes.

this legit made me shoot my coffee out my nose from laughing so hard. well done @Chumbalaya

7 hours ago, Cuz05 said:

Removing the ban context may alter the message beyond your intention, if so I apologise.

Personally, banlist = Hyperspace. It's not a topic I think has any value, regarding the current fire.

Even if Extended is not entirely balanced, it can be more balanced than this and aside from Spamtex, may even be nearly acceptably balanced. We haven't seen whether that is the case yet. Because Spamtex.

I'd like to add a C) option that keeps Extended balance a worthy, if difficult and ultimately hopeless aim. Since reasonable people exist who would like to enjoy it.

I feel like the scent in here of meh, it's Extended, it sucks by default, has kinda clouded the issue and lead to much of the dismissiveness and crossed wires.

This particular issue has obviously been done to death and the conclusion is clear. PACE is undercosted by 2-4pts and need addressing. 2pt if you think theyre fine, 4 if not, I guess. FFG will decide that. Once that is done, we can look at the fall out and assess who was right all along.

Any further fuss on the subject is more to do with personal opinion on best X Wing than it is anything else and therefore pretty much just worthless back and forth.

Fair.

4 minutes ago, Boom Owl said:

I just wish there was room for a middle ground where CIS Swarm, Sinker Swarm, Drea Swarm, Howl Swarm, Syck Swarm, and Focho were not banished to the shadow realm for being relevant.

The reality is, there is an incredibly narrow middle ground that (hopefully?) exists and is certainly hard to hit. It certainly seems to be an issue in skirmish games that your best bet is to maximize one pillar of your list. The genie is super far out of the bottle, so I don't really know how you fix it from here. I wonder what the game would look like if "if ace" chassis had supporty abilities. So say something like Obi wan were the standard. Would that theoretically encourage players to take more of the ace plus miniswarm archetype, but i don't know how you don't just end up with aces supporting each other. Maybe force organization charts is the lazy solution for 3.0? Though you could probably include it now

20 minutes ago, Boom Owl said:

As someone who has played a ton of 3 ship aces (especially in 2.0 since its always decent against everything besides the lost bid archetype mirror) and enjoyed such lists (moving last, not taking much damage, and deleting **** is fun) I 100% understand the "swarms are the enemy mentality". I know where it comes from. I disagree with it, I don't like it, but I accept it and genuinely understand it.

That said, I think there should be room to say that X-Wing is a "better" game when played at higher average ship counts (4.5-5.5) and lower upgrade investment (i.e. Hyperspace) without getting shouted down as being an irrational fake news enemy of ace freedom. This should not be a controversial thing to say or something that makes people angry to read. And boy do they get mad about reading "hey is Soontir undercosted?"

To your point though, swarms are such a wildly unpopular archetype ( both in terms of % of field and % of Sad vs Bad feelings ) that I can only die on that hill for so long. If the people overwhelming want to play endless Dash vs Vader or Boba vs Rey or Mango vs Obi their opinion is no less valid. If Swarms are relegated to B-Tier so they still "exist" but not as competitively relevant lists that might make the maximum # of X-Wing players happy? Maybe thats the ideal timeline? They see maybe 1 or 0 Swarms per Swiss, get to have the protagonist sugar rush and tell their friends about it, then move on to seeing whether or not they won the initiative roll in the rest of their games.

The trouble with Ace v Ace metas is it largely boils down to who moves last. Always has, even across formats. Good swarms are necessary to add some amount of unique flavor back to the 2.0 gameplay loop. I care more about tactical variety than I do archetype or list variety. If a Meta is 70% Aces ( Big Orange 2-4 Ships definition of Aces not strictly Double Repo and takes damage Definition) I genuinely view that as "mostly the same archetype" and I always will, no one can convince me not to. Empire Aces and Republic Aces are the same thing. **** Boba+1 is fundamentally the same as Oli's list in terms of what it does. Even Vader Soontir +2 or Ani Obi + 2 are fundamentally the same archetype. Turrets, control, and bombs can mix that up a bit but we have been repeatedly down that particular path in 1.0 with pretty bad gameplay results. Only when you begin to mix 5-8 ships relevantly into the competitive game do you start to see genuine tactical variety. From both the Ace players reacting to the questions the Swarm asks them in game, and the Swarm players wrestling with how to fight the aces, and the Ace + Swarm lists playing both sides.

I just wish there was room for a middle ground where CIS Swarm, Sinker Swarm, Drea Swarm, Howl Swarm, Syck Swarm, and Focho were not banished to the shadow realm for being relevant.

I also wish more players were vocal about the necessity of Swarms being relevant for 2.0 to be a healthy gameplay experience. That doesn't mean Aces would be unplayable or Low Ship counts would be unplayable either. We need good Swarms for the same reason nature needs Sharks and Wolves.

A part of me has to still blame the low cost of aces for this situation. If aces chose between arc dodging and modifying shots, generics are closer in power level and you don't need huge numbers of them. Currently, however, aces typically can both dodge and get modded, sometimes double modded shots. This means you need a lot of generics to counter them, which means when generics get competitive, there's so many it feelsbad.

To elaborate, the power of a squad is not linear with respect to the number. 4 Generics aren't 33% better than 3 generics, they're more than 33% better because cooperation between ships matters so much more for low initative than for typical aces. You end up having something sort of like an inflection point where above that number you have a big advantage and below that number you rapidly get to a point where you cannot win. If aces are less powerful, low initiative stuff is less reliant on being above the "inflection point"*, and it can be effective at lower "reasonable", "non swarmy" numbers.

*not an actual mathematical inflection point

TLDR

Right now, 3 aces vs 4 generics is a joke (with equivalent ship chassis) . 3 aces vs 5 generics might be a game, but it depends on a lot of stuff. If aces only got to dodge, not dodge and also get good mods, 3 aces vs 4 generics starts seeming like a closer game, so you don't need to have dramatically cheap generics.

2 minutes ago, catachanninja said:

The reality is, there is an incredibly narrow middle ground that (hopefully?) exists and is certainly hard to hit. It certainly seems to be an issue in skirmish games that your best bet is to maximize one pillar of your list. The genie is super far out of the bottle, so I don't really know how you fix it from here. I wonder what the game would look like if "if ace" chassis had supporty abilities. So say something like Obi wan were the standard. Would that theoretically encourage players to take more of the ace plus miniswarm archetype, but i don't know how you don't just end up with aces supporting each other. Maybe force organization charts is the lazy solution for 3.0? Though you could probably include it now

We've had conversations about dots on initiatives. But honestly I think you should be allowed to bring a swarm or trip ace if you want. I think they just need to raise the cost of the top tier aces so you can really afford to bring one stellar ace like vader/whisper/soontir in your trip ace list. That also gives more room on the bottom to price out generics differently (CIS generic dots are also a super neat thing they could add to other factions to help).

I am however super in on a one off tournament where we're required to ace squad squad gang gang

11 minutes ago, Biophysical said:

A part of me has to still blame the low cost of aces for this situation. If aces chose between arc dodging and modifying shots, generics are closer in power level and you don't need huge numbers of them. Currently, however, aces typically can both dodge and get modded, sometimes double modded shots. This means you need a lot of generics to counter them, which means when generics get competitive, there's so many it feelsbad.

To elaborate, the power of a squad is not linear with respect to the number. 4 Generics aren't 33% better than 3 generics, they're more than 33% better because cooperation between ships matters so much more for low initative than for typical aces. You end up having something sort of like an inflection point where above that number you have a big advantage and below that number you rapidly get to a point where you cannot win. If aces are less powerful, low initiative stuff is less reliant on being above the "inflection point"*, and it can be effective at lower "reasonable", "non swarmy" numbers.

*not an actual mathematical inflection point

TLDR

Right now, 3 aces vs 4 generics is a joke (with equivalent ship chassis) . 3 aces vs 5 generics might be a game, but it depends on a lot of stuff. If aces only got to dodge, not dodge and also get good mods, 3 aces vs 4 generics starts seeming like a closer game, so you don't need to have dramatically cheap generics.

7 minutes ago, jagsba said:

We've had conversations about dots on initiatives. But honestly I think you should be allowed to bring a swarm or trip ace if you want. I think they just need to raise the cost of the top tier aces so you can really afford to bring one stellar ace like vader/whisper/soontir in your trip ace list. That also gives more room on the bottom to price out generics differently (CIS generic dots are also a super neat thing they could add to other factions to help).

I think all of this is true. I agree with all the math and underlying premise.

I think all of this might be ignoring what the masses might actually enjoy - which is that people may stop enjoying games at 6+ ships (if the 6+ ships are actually competitive).

Basically, I think people want a game more balanced around 2-4 ships, and sometimes 5 ships. People just seem to really enjoy that. I cannot fully back this up, because it would require more rigorous market research, and i'm not paid to do that. But man, I'd lay down $5 on that bet.

Edit: this is separate from the above statements from whether you can balance the game as you noted above. You likely can - I just worry if people will like it less.

Anti-ace idea:

New tournament rule, applies to Hyperspace, maybe to Extended as well. Casuals can DWYWM.

1. You can only take one ship of I6+

2. You can only take two ships of I5+

3. You can only take four ships of I4+

This stops Spamtex, Trip aces, etc. Doesn't stop Anakin/Obi/Mace but... that's not the worst thing in the world maybe? I don't think Mace has been the problem as much as Ani/Obi/Plo or Obi/Plo/Ric etc.

Also doesn't completely kill Resistance but definitely makes them need a little more creativity rather than just the "MOAR I5s" they're currently at...

Hmmm...

2 minutes ago, Tlfj200 said:

I think all of this is true. I agree with all the math and underlying premise.

I think all of this might be ignoring what the masses might actually enjoy - which is that people may stop enjoying games at 6+ ships (if the 6+ ships are actually competitive).

Basically, I think people want a game more balanced around 2-4 ships, and sometimes 5 ships. People just seem to really enjoy that. I cannot fully back this up, because it would require more rigorous market research, and i'm not paid to do that. But man, I'd lay down $5 on that bet.

I'm very much in on the idea that if you asked the people what they want they'd say a better horse.

When I have time to walk someone through a swarm matchup and let them practice against it, they're far less salty about swarms.

I also am just speculating out my tucchus but I think if people saw and played against swarms more they'd be far less salty about them

Should the unique brutes be fielded? You're paying extra for abilities that can be negated with am easy nasty crit chain. If you're just fielding a cheap Craig, you feel easier about letting the points go.

The moral is if you're going to field a gorilla that gets headshot by an edgelord, play Harambe and not Tartarus.

2 minutes ago, Hoarder of Garlic Bread said:

Should the unique brutes be fielded? You're paying extra for abilities that can be negated with am easy nasty crit chain. If you're just fielding a cheap Craig, you feel easier about letting the points go.

The moral is if you're going to field a Gorilla that gets headshot by an edgelord, play Harambe and not Tartarus.

I... have no idea what you just said.

Am I the boomer now?

6 minutes ago, Hoarder of Garlic Bread said:

Should the unique brutes be fielded? You're paying extra for abilities that can be negated with am easy nasty crit chain. If you're just fielding a cheap Craig, you feel easier about letting the points go.

Given that the abilities are more balanced and there's no Iden to save them, we can hope that the pricing will be more competitive than the likes of Howl/Drea/Sinker, and more in line with something like Cardinal/Stridan...

3 minutes ago, Tlfj200 said:

I... have no idea what you just said.

Am I the boomer now?

I'm on mobile, so I can't insert image, but Randy the Intern "OK, Boomer":

"Craig" is the name the internet gave the low-quality brute model from the upcoming Halo: Infinite. As a combination of the eased expression, leftover Harambe memes, the fact that the game isn't finished, and the more relaxed atmosphere of the game (Halo: Breath of the Wild), "Craig" is associated with letting things go--a dramatic departure from brutes being raging beasts, even in Halo: Infinite. The lowly generic TIE Brute has been dubbed "Craig".

Tartarus is the main brute in Halo 2. Big boi with scary hammer, but when his shields are down, he drops down fast, even on Legendary difficulty.

2 minutes ago, Hoarder of Garlic Bread said:

I'm on mobile, so I can't insert image, but Randy the Intern "OK, Boomer":

"Craig" is the name the internet gave the low-quality brute model from the upcoming Halo: Infinite. As a combination of the eased expression, leftover Harambe memes, the fact that the game isn't finished, and the more relaxed atmosphere of the game (Halo: Breath of the Wild), "Craig" is associated with letting things go--a dramatic departure from brutes being raging beasts, even in Halo: Infinite. The lowly generic TIE Brute has been dubbed "Craig".

Tartarus is the main brute in Halo 2. Big boi with scary hammer, but when his shields are down, he drops down fast, even on Legendary difficulty.

So... yes, I am the boomer.

5 minutes ago, ClassicalMoser said:

Given that the abilities are more balanced and there's no Iden to save them, we can hope that the pricing will be more competitive than the likes of Howl/Drea/Sinker, and more in line with something like Cardinal/Stridan...

Stridan has a few more tricks with Malarus crew, but for a few points more you're still just better taking Tavson or for a few points less Thannison or Starkiller, lol

9 minutes ago, Tlfj200 said:

I... have no idea what you just said.

Am I the boomer now?

Replace any noun you didn't understand with tie brute. Except edgelord. Replace that with @Brunas

I think on some level it's the feeling of being behind early that gets people upset. Swarms do that, but Jumpmasters did too. Remember palp aces had like twice the representation but Jumpmasters are what got people mad. People like to feel that they're in the game, even if your brain knows that you can't actually hurt palp autothrusters Soontir. Jumpmasters just annihilated that illusion by going up so early.

Swarms are very similar in that aspect. When you're playing your hypothetical wholesome Rebel NPC 4 ship Dutch list you will lose to Swarms and Aces at a roughly similar rate. However, because the aces pick at you and toy with you all game, you feel like you have a shot and the game is close. The swarm, however, just trades efficiently and you visually see your squad get reduced in size while the swarm loses some but not all and that feels bad.

3 minutes ago, Chumbalaya said:

I think on some level it's the feeling of being behind early that gets people upset. Swarms do that, but Jumpmasters did too. Remember palp aces had like twice the representation but Jumpmasters are what got people mad. People like to feel that they're in the game, even if your brain knows that you can't actually hurt palp autothrusters Soontir. Jumpmasters just annihilated that illusion by going up so early.

Swarms are very similar in that aspect. When you're playing your hypothetical wholesome Rebel NPC 4 ship Dutch list you will lose to Swarms and Aces at a roughly similar rate. However, because the aces pick at you and toy with you all game, you feel like you have a shot and the game is close. The swarm, however, just trades efficiently and you visually see your squad get reduced in size while the swarm loses some but not all and that feels bad.

Which lines up with a big complaint I saw about voldemort. Init killing with a swarm exacerbates that feels bad man

24 minutes ago, Tlfj200 said:

I... have no idea what you just said.

Am I the boomer now?

Does this help?