I just realized you have some wrong numbers for Polish SoS by your reddit post, I think you should double check them (there was just 1 GHost Fenn in that cut for example)

Anyway, your data seems to confirm that we have one of the most diverse meta ever: in 2016 45% of the meta was Palpaces and Jumps, in 2017 we had token stacking madness taking 40% of the meta, with Parattanni and Defenders taking the largest part (and the 5% of Ghost Biggs could be argued is just another kind of token stacking, at least the one without Finn definetely was).

Right now the 45% is taken by much more different archetypes (and which the #1 taking a far smaller portion of the meta compared by previous #1):

-Ghost Fenn

-Palpaces

-Dash+

-Nymranda

-Rey+

Are all lists that play quite differently from one another, the most similars are probably Ghost Fenn and Dash+/Rey+ (and those 2 are also different from each other)

And yeah, old Palpatine was one of the dumbest thing ever designed for xwing. I'm glad that level or certainty is gone

33 minutes ago, Sunitsa said:

I just realized you have some wrong numbers for Polish SoS by your reddit post, I think you should double check them (there was just 1 GHost Fenn in that cut for example)

Anyway, your data seems to confirm that we have one of the most diverse meta ever: in 2016 45% of the meta was Palpaces and Jumps, in 2017 we had token stacking madness taking 40% of the meta, with Parattanni and Defenders taking the largest part (and the 5% of Ghost Biggs could be argued is just another kind of token stacking, at least the one without Finn definetely was).

Right now the 45% is taken by much more different archetypes (and which the #1 taking a far smaller portion of the meta compared by previous #1):

-Ghost Fenn

-Palpaces

-Dash+

-Nymranda

-Rey+

Are all lists that play quite differently from one another, the most similars are probably Ghost Fenn and Dash+/Rey+ (and those 2 are also different from each other)

And yeah, old Palpatine was one of the dumbest thing ever designed for xwing. I'm glad that level or certainty is gone

Poland System Open

You're right about the ghost fenn count. I eyeballed it because I don't normally do individual tournament breakdowns (we do broad-meta analysis, so we want the aggregation of tournaments), so two of those three ghosts are ghost + low.

Because of that, I went ahead and pulled out the raw Poland SOS cut data:

Poland SOS Cut breakdown

I think I disagree on the differences of Rey + and Dash +: the main thrust of all of those lists are Rey and Dash. They're the primary win condition. We aggregate all Reys and Dashes together. For example, it's unfair to aggregate double and triple scout lists while also trying to further parse out rey and dash lists.

Further, the main thrust of all 100 point aces is to bring defensive tricks to keep the ace alive until the endgame, where it is the fattest thing on the board. They basically all regen (Corran, Norra, Miranda, Poe), and have lowhrick as a friend (used to be biggs, or both biggs and lowhrick).

Diversity

I think I disagree. The Meta comparison sheet attempts to answer diversity by the same principle, and the number of lists to reach 50%, 75%, and 90% are almost the same for all metas. Even if I were to give you 2016 because of scouts (take it - everyone claims they hated that meta anyway), 2017 regionals were as diverse, and that was "all mindlink".

This meta is no more diverse than other metas - the question is: is it fun?

If old palp aces were unfun because they didnt take damage, I don't see why a bunch of defensive stacking and regen is super fun either. But, to be fair, that is only my personal opinion.

13 minutes ago, Tlfj200 said:

If old palp aces were unfun because they didnt take damage, I don't see why a bunch of defensive stacking and regen is super fun either. But, to be fair, that is only my personal opinion.

Lowhrick is essentially a better Palp Shuttle. He is a small based ship that doesn’t give up half points, has reinforce, and can ADD an evade result to a friendly ship whenever he feels like it, while also having access to an EPT and 2 Crew slots. Palp took those two Crew slots, doesn’t have a 180 arc, and always gave up 14/29 points each game. Oh and Palp only got to change dice not add them. At least Aces were exciting to play for and against. You never saw a final table at a major event where the players get so bored playing Palp Aces that they decided to play Loopin Chewy instead.

32 minutes ago, Tbetts94 said:

Lowhrick is essentially a better Palp Shuttle. He is a small based ship that doesn’t give up half points, has reinforce, and can ADD an evade result to a friendly ship whenever he feels like it, while also having access to an EPT and 2 Crew slots. Palp took those two Crew slots, doesn’t have a 180 arc, and always gave up 14/29 points each game. Oh and Palp only got to change dice not add them. At least Aces were exciting to play for and against. You never saw a final table at a major event where the players get so bored playing Palp Aces that they decided to play Loopin Chewy instead.

Who could have known this!

I definitely didn't have this written on some of the cards that were given out at adepticon!

19 minutes ago, Tlfj200 said:

Poland System Open

You're right about the ghost fenn count. I eyeballed it because I don't normally do individual tournament breakdowns (we do broad-meta analysis, so we want the aggregation of tournaments), so two of those three ghosts are ghost + low.

Because of that, I went ahead and pulled out the raw Poland SOS cut data:

Poland SOS Cut breakdown

My point is the 3 Ghosts in the cut in Poland were actually 3 different archetype:

1) classic Ezra+Maul Ghost Fenn (r3a2 doesn't change much)

2) Kanan with Synched Turret (it plays a whole different game than the Lothal Rebel of the Ghost Fenn)

3) A Weird Kanan + Lowrick with Phantom II title

While I understand perfectly how this can not be apparent while gathering data, they are different. Labelling them as the same (while also making an effort to differentiate between 3 jumps and 2 jumps + bumpmaster) is very misleading imo and can directly be followed by a shortsighted statement saying "Ghost Fenn still prevalent in Poland" while it was actually the first major tournement, at least of which I am aware of, where Ghsot Fenn performed poorly.

19 minutes ago, Tlfj200 said:

I think I disagree on the differences of Rey + and Dash +: the main thrust of all of those lists are Rey and Dash. They're the primary win condition. We aggregate all Reys and Dashes together. For example, it's unfair to aggregate double and triple scout lists while also trying to further parse out rey and dash lists.

I meant the difference on playstyle: Dash is more about an arcdodging attrition game while Rey is a jousting one (at least on average). They play a different game. In my previous post I was comparing them the Ghost Fenn which could actually play both kind of games as it sees fit. But between Rey and Dash the differences are wider

Double Jump + Bumpmaster, Partybus + 2 jumps and 3 Jumps played the same kind of game, with differences more on the tone of R3A2 or FAA for the GHost Fenn than the differences between Dash or Rey.

And back on Rey topic I also think that labelling Rey Lowhrick as the same archetype of Rey + Poe is also misleading, since those lists have different win conditions since one sports a point fortress ace as late game threat, the other a sturdy support ship to maximize Rey efficiency

19 minutes ago, Tlfj200 said:

Further, the main thrust of all 100 point aces is to bring defensive tricks to keep the ace alive until the endgame, where it is the fattest thing on the board. They basically all regen (Corran, Norra, Miranda, Poe), and have lowhrick as a friend (used to be biggs, or both biggs and lowhrick).

I generally speaking agree on your 100 point aces definition, but again I think you are having it a bit too wide in the specific case of the Poland SoS (I know this is just an event, I'm just using it as an example because it's recent and we have both a clear data about it)

You are inflating your 100 point ace count if you put in the same wide term Miranda+Low+Sheatiped and Miranda+Pava+TLT Hawk.

Especially in an historical contest where Chicago final just happened which made quite clear the perceived issue being Low+Sheathipede, not other form of 100 point aces

19 minutes ago, Tlfj200 said:

Diversity

I think I disagree. The Meta comparison sheet attempts to answer diversity by the same principle, and the number of lists to reach 50%, 75%, and 90% are almost the same for all metas. Even if I were to give you 2016 because of scouts (take it - everyone claims they hated that meta anyway), 2017 regionals were as diverse, and that was "all mindlink".

But it's your own data collection that shows more diversity right now.

2016:

• 24% Palpaces
• 15% non-Dengaroo Jumpmasters (you can divide them as 8% 2 scouts+ and 7.5% 3 Jumps

That's 40% of the meta. With a further 5% composed by non palpa imperial aces

2017

• 23% Parattanni
• 10% Palpaces
• 9% non palpatine triple imperial (which should mean 1-2 x7 defenders+ )

That's another 40% and counting of the meta which had the common theme of absurd token stacking, hard to kill lists. It goes even worse if we start adding similar archetypes like the 4% triple defender, the uncountable part of those 5% Kanan+ who hadn't Finn on the GHost and, arguably, the 3% Dengaroo.

Am I making a too broad connection in this case? It could be

Then it comes the 2018

• 16% Ghost Fenn
• 9% Palpaces
• 8% Dash+
• 7% Nymranda

That's 40% of the meta and it's divided between archetypes that have a different gameplay between each others.

To summarize we had 40% of the meta composed by 2 archetypes in 2016, 42% of 2017 split between 3 archetypes who shared the same core gameplay of stacking a ridicoulous amount of defense and a 2018 with the 40% composed by almost entirely different archetypes.

I'd call it diversity

19 minutes ago, Tlfj200 said:

This meta is no more diverse than other metas - the question is: is it fun?

If old palp aces were unfun because they didnt take damage, I don't see why a bunch of defensive stacking and regen is super fun either. But, to be fair, that is only my personal opinion.

And that's another point. Probably even a good one.

But once we start talking about fun we are entering in a far more subjective sphere. I don't like a bunch of defense stacking regen ships as I didn't like Palpatine. And I think @Tbetts94 just made an excelent comparison between old palpa and Lowhrick (even if old Palpa was stronger by his sheer adaptability and full mat actionless reliability).

@Tlfj200 please take my wall of text as tokens of gratitude to your awesome data collection. I really like your work, I'm doing all of this pinpointing and cherry picking exactly because I would love to see it improved

58 minutes ago, Tbetts94 said:

Lowhrick is essentially a better Palp Shuttle. He is a small based ship that doesn’t give up half points, has reinforce, and can ADD an evade result to a friendly ship whenever he feels like it, while also having access to an EPT and 2 Crew slots. Palp took those two Crew slots, doesn’t have a 180 arc, and always gave up 14/29 points each game.

Palp was also never shut down by bumping obstacles, blocking or stress, or limited to range one. Lowhrick's ability is reliant on him being able to perform actions. Small points maybe, but not insignificant ones.

2 minutes ago, FTS Gecko said:

Palp was also never shut down by bumping or stressor limited to range one. Lowhrick's ability is reliant on him being able to perform actions. Small points maybe, but not insignificant ones.

Definitely not insignificant. Blocking is actually one of the more reliable ways to take Lowhrick+ lists down provided you can still throw enough dice at the Wookie with other stuff.

25 minutes ago, Sunitsa said:

@Tlfj200 please take my wall of text as tokens of gratitude to your awesome data collection. I really like your work, I'm doing all of this pinpointing and cherry picking exactly because I would love to see it improved

No worries! The point of having sharing the data is for common use. This is a one-man operation, so feedback and criticism is fine!

25 minutes ago, Sunitsa said:

My point is the 3 Ghosts in the cut in Poland were actually 3 different archetype:

1) classic Ezra+Maul Ghost Fenn (r3a2 doesn't change much)

2) Kanan with Synched Turret (it plays a whole different game than the Lothal Rebel of the Ghost Fenn)

3) A Weird Kanan + Lowrick with Phantom II title

While I understand perfectly how this can not be apparent while gathering data, they are different. Labelling them as the same (while also making an effort to differentiate between 3 jumps and 2 jumps + bumpmaster) is very misleading imo and can directly be followed by a shortsighted statement saying "Ghost Fenn still prevalent in Poland" while it was actually the first major tournement, at least of which I am aware of, where Ghsot Fenn performed poorly.

You're right here - I mislabeled it in my posts. The data itself isn't mislabeled, though.

25 minutes ago, Sunitsa said:

I meant the difference on playstyle: Dash is more about an arcdodging attrition game while Rey is a jousting one (at least on average). They play a different game. In my previous post I was comparing them the Ghost Fenn which could actually play both kind of games as it sees fit. But between Rey and Dash the differences are wider

Double Jump + Bumpmaster, Partybus + 2 jumps and 3 Jumps played the same kind of game, with differences more on the tone of R3A2 or FAA for the GHost Fenn than the differences between Dash or Rey.

And back on Rey topic I also think that labelling Rey Lowhrick as the same archetype of Rey + Poe is also misleading, since those lists have different win conditions since one sports a point fortress ace as late game threat, the other a sturdy support ship to maximize Rey efficiency

So, one thing that is worth laying out first: this data is used for our personal analysis on what to practice against to prepare for worlds.

So, in that specific light, I still disagree on the dash and rey points. In each case, the premise is the same. I'm just arguing they don't play differently ENOUGH for us to bother making the distinction. We don't go "Well, there's dash, but what if it's POE? Do I tech so differently?" (The answer is no - I figure out how to deal with dash, or don't, with whatever I'm practicing with).

25 minutes ago, Sunitsa said:

I generally speaking agree on your 100 point aces definition, but again I think you are having it a bit too wide in the specific case of the Poland SoS (I know this is just an event, I'm just using it as an example because it's recent and we have both a clear data about it)

You are inflating your 100 point ace count if you put in the same wide term Miranda+Low+Sheatiped and Miranda+Pava+TLT Hawk.

Especially in an historical contest where Chicago final just happened which made quite clear the perceived issue being Low+Sheathipede, not other form of 100 point aces

While I agree the 100 point aces can have some variation, the general strategy of attacking the list remains mostly the same. Some bring Strezra, some bring Fenn, but I still have to deal with cracking the defense the same way.

Almost all bring Miranda now, btw.

25 minutes ago, Sunitsa said:

But it's your own data collection that shows more diversity right now.

2016:

• 24% Palpaces
• 15% non-Dengaroo Jumpmasters (you can divide them as 8% 2 scouts+ and 7.5% 3 Jumps

That's 40% of the meta. With a further 5% composed by non palpa imperial aces

2017

• 23% Parattanni
• 10% Palpaces
• 9% non palpatine triple imperial (which should mean 1-2 x7 defenders+ )

That's another 40% and counting of the meta which had the common theme of absurd token stacking, hard to kill lists. It goes even worse if we start adding similar archetypes like the 4% triple defender, the uncountable part of those 5% Kanan+ who hadn't Finn on the GHost and, arguably, the 3% Dengaroo.

Am I making a too broad connection in this case? It could be

Then it comes the 2018

• 16% Ghost Fenn
• 9% Palpaces
• 8% Dash+
• 7% Nymranda

That's 40% of the meta and it's divided between archetypes that have a different gameplay between each others.

To summarize we had 40% of the meta composed by 2 archetypes in 2016, 42% of 2017 split between 3 archetypes who shared the same core gameplay of stacking a ridicoulous amount of defense and a 2018 with the 40% composed by almost entirely different archetypes.

I'd call it diversity

I think we're looking at the same data and arriving at different conclusions. You're arbitrarily cutting off at 40%, and we're disagreeing on what should be aggregated.

I played extensively in the deadeye scout days, and double scout+ vs triple scout was a different tactic. The 3rd partner usually threatened my list in a substantially different way than a 3rd torpedo scout would. Our playgroup agreed, and thus the separation.

All of that aside, I have the 50, 75, and 90% markers listed, and in each meta, you get basically the same number of lists at each threshold. That's why I'm saying they're as diverse (separate from whether those numbers are diverse).

25 minutes ago, Sunitsa said:

But once we start talking about fun we are entering in a far more subjective sphere. I don't like a bunch of defense stacking regen ships as I didn't like Palpatine. And I think @Tbetts94 just made an excelent comparison between old palpa and Lowhrick (even if old Palpa was stronger by his sheer adaptability and full mat actionless reliability).

As for fun... it's mostly relative, though I suspect we all play the game for some underlying commonalities.

My lack of fun is because lists with turrets, regen and bombs are the dominant strategy, which diminish the importance of dials. I prefer when arcs are a dominant strategy (which emphasizes dials).

To elaborate - a turret obviously cares about it's dial, but it doesn't care about it's arc: it only cars about it's opponent's arcs so that it doesn't get shot. That drastically changes your strategy, because you don't fundamentally need to point at your enemy to shoot. Combine that with bombs (punishing following), and it makes anything with an arc that much harder to get shots on you. Further coupled with a regeneration ability, and now that the arc-ed ship can't keep its guns on you consistently, the damage it manages to do inbetween can be negated.

And while some people may find the strategy of turret spam v turret spam fun, I just personally don't - it's not my thing.

11 minutes ago, Tlfj200 said:

My lack of fun is because lists with turrets, regen and bombs are the dominant strategy, which diminish the importance of dials. I prefer when arcs are a dominant strategy (which emphasizes dials).

To elaborate - a turret obviously cares about it's dial, but it doesn't care about it's arc: it only cars about it's opponent's arcs so that it doesn't get shot. That drastically changes your strategy, because you don't fundamentally need to point at your enemy to shoot. Combine that with bombs (punishing following), and it makes anything with an arc that much harder to get shots on you. Further coupled with a regeneration ability, and now that the arc-ed ship can't keep its guns on you consistently, the damage it manages to do inbetween can be negated.

That kind of gameplay can be extremely fun. I just don't need to play X-Wing with other people to experience it.

1 hour ago, FTS Gecko said:

Palp was also never shut down by bumping obstacles, blocking or stress, or limited to range one. Lowhrick's ability is reliant on him being able to perform actions. Small points maybe, but not insignificant ones.

If only Rebels had access to a PS11 ship that has coordinate at a cheap point cost or only if most Rebel builds were built around Range 1 and formations.

45 minutes ago, Tlfj200 said:

So, one thing that is worth laying out first: this data is used for our personal analysis on what to practice against to prepare for worlds.

So, in that specific light, I still disagree on the dash and rey points. In each case, the premise is the same. I'm just arguing they don't play differently ENOUGH for us to bother making the distinction. We don't go "Well, there's dash, but what if it's POE? Do I tech so differently?" (The answer is no - I figure out how to deal with dash, or don't, with whatever I'm practicing with).

Wait, I think we are misunderstanding each other: I'm not saying that Dash+Miranda or Dash+Poe is THAT different (altough not for data gathering purpose, for testing it's another story IF you are playing certain kind of lists, ordnance heavy in particular)

On the difference of archetypes I was speaking about the various version of Rey+ since it is in fact different if her wingman is Lowrick or Poe.

Would be worth to test against both if someone has limited amount of time before world? Probably not, I would just go for the most common. But since you aren't making a distinction on that regard you are also relaying on what you feel is the most common (I assume is the Rey+Lowrick)

45 minutes ago, Tlfj200 said:

While I agree the 100 point aces can have some variation, the general strategy of attacking the list remains mostly the same. Some bring Strezra, some bring Fenn, but I still have to deal with cracking the defense the same way.

Almost all bring Miranda now, btw.

Some of those 100 point aces bring you to a somehow different game than others, especially those with Pava and a moldy crow TLT Hawk. But yeah, if you are doing that analisis to better prepare for Worlds it might be a pointless distinction.

But if you also bring up those data to prove something about the current state of the game, I think the distinction should be done

45 minutes ago, Tlfj200 said:

I think we're looking at the same data and arriving at different conclusions. You're arbitrarily cutting off at 40%, and we're disagreeing on what should be aggregated.

I played extensively in the deadeye scout days, and double scout+ vs triple scout was a different tactic. The 3rd partner usually threatened my list in a substantially different way than a 3rd torpedo scout would. Our playgroup agreed, and thus the separation.

All of that aside, I have the 50, 75, and 90% markers listed, and in each meta, you get basically the same number of lists at each threshold. That's why I'm saying they're as diverse (separate from whether those numbers are diverse).

I can do the same analisis for 50% of the cut, I think it would also make my point stronger actually.

2016 52%

• 24% Palpaces
• 8% Double Scouts+
• 7.5% 3 Scouts
• 6.5% 2 Ships non dengaroo scum
• 5.5% Triple Empire

of those 52%, 45.5% is split between 29.5% of Imperial Aces and 14.5% of Torpedo Jumpmasters. Yeah you are taking 5 different archetype, and there are actually some degrees of difference, but mostly those numbers say that almost a half of the meta were split by basically jsut two kind of lists.

2017 51.5%

• 22.5% Parattanni
• 10% Palpaces
• 9% non palpatine triple imperial
• 5% Bombs
• 5% Kanan+

Again, we have 41.5% of the meta split between Parattanni and Imperial Aces/Defenders, which were both quite similar list to face

2018

• 16% Ghost Fenn
• 9% Palpaces
• 8% Dash+
• 7% Nymranda
• 7% Rey+
• 6% Triple Imperial

Am I really the only who sees more variety here?

42 minutes ago, Tbetts94 said:

If only Rebels had access to a PS11 ship that has coordinate at a cheap point cost or only if most Rebel builds were built around Range 1 and formations.

If only that particular combo didn't come in at 51 points minimum, a little over half your squad value. And if only that PS11 ship with co-ordinate couldn't be blocked as well...

I mean, 6 vs 5 lists making up the top 50% is not a huge increase in variety. Also, using your metric of grouping all jumpmasters and all imperials as similar lists, 44% of the top squads are fat Rebel turrets between Ghost/Fenn, Nymranda, Dash+, and Rey+ in the current meta. Basically half the cut in the current meta is rebel fat turrets as of Feb 25th by those numbers. The fact that 4 different fat turrets are part of that doesn't make it a super varied meta, it just means the archetype is so dominant that multiple expressions of the same strategy are viable.

In fact, if the argument is that triple aces and palp aces are the same (not a great argument but we'll go with it), this meta has just 2 options in the top half of all cuts. Fat rebel turrets or imperial aces.

1 hour ago, Tlfj200 said:

To elaborate - a turret obviously cares about it's dial, but it doesn't care about it's arc: it only cares about it's opponent's arcs so that it doesn't get shot. That drastically changes your strategy, because you don't fundamentally need to point at your enemy to shoot. Combine that with bombs (punishing following), and it makes anything with an arc that much harder to get shots on you. Further coupled with a regeneration ability, and now that the arc-ed ship can't keep its guns on you consistently, the damage it manages to do inbetween can be negated.

And while some people may find the strategy of turret spam v turret spam fun, I just personally don't - it's not my thing.

This.

so **** this!

22 minutes ago, Sunitsa said:

2017 51.5%

• 22.5% Parattanni
• 10% Palpaces
• 9% non palpatine triple imperial
• 5% Bombs
• 5% Kanan+

It's worth noting that it's not 22.5% Paratanni - it's anything with mindlink.

Even we felt that was unfair, as mindlink variants are QUITE different in strategy (but since I did the large aggregate to save me time). The further breakdown of "mindlink" is:

• Paratanni - 9.8%
• Old Fenaroo - 4.68%
• Double Scout + Fenn - 1.28%
• Triple Scouts - 1.28%
• Old ***[aj] Fenn - 0.85%
• Other Mindlink - 2.55%

32 minutes ago, mdl0114 said:

I mean, 6 vs 5 lists making up the top 50% is not a huge increase in variety. Also, using your metric of grouping all jumpmasters and all imperials as similar lists, 44% of the top squads are fat Rebel turrets between Ghost/Fenn, Nymranda, Dash+, and Rey+ in the current meta. Basically half the cut in the current meta is rebel fat turrets as of Feb 25th by those numbers. The fact that 4 different fat turrets are part of that doesn't make it a super varied meta, it just means the archetype is so dominant that multiple expressions of the same strategy are viable.

In fact, if the argument is that triple aces and palp aces are the same (not a great argument but we'll go with it), this meta has just 2 options in the top half of all cuts. Fat rebel turrets or imperial aces.

My argument has never been that they were the same, but that they shared much more similarity in gameplay than what you currently call fat rebel turrets do. Rey is a turret that wants arc, Nymranda wants arc but could also kite very effectively and Dash wants to arcdodge. The only other archetype that shares those definitions is Ghost Fenn.

There are really more difference in how "3 imperials" and "palpaces" were playing rather than in how a "Rey+" and "Dash+" plays?

You have a point thought, based on my own criteria I should probably count both Ghost Fenn and Dash+ together.

And bear in mind I'm not making a comment on the quality of said archetypes gameplay, I'm not that sold either. But I've never been sold on how most the top meta has ever played, so...

31 minutes ago, Tlfj200 said:

It's worth noting that it's not 22.5% Paratanni - it's anything with mindlink.

Even we felt that was unfair, as mindlink variants are QUITE different in strategy (but since I did the large aggregate to save me time). The further breakdown of "mindlink" is:

• Paratanni - 9.8%
• Old Fenaroo - 4.68%
• Double Scout + Fenn - 1.28%
• Triple Scouts - 1.28%
• Old ***[aj] Fenn - 0.85%
• Other Mindlink - 2.55%

Well... That changes thing.

But how was I supposed to know you guys were counting all of this different stuff together?!?

11 minutes ago, Sunitsa said:

Well... That changes thing.

But how was I supposed to know you guys were counting all of this different stuff together?!?

LOL - you weren't! I just forgot that I did that.

I did all of this stuff back in February. Sorry about that!

30 minutes ago, Sunitsa said:

My argument has never been that they were the same, but that they shared much more similarity in gameplay than what you currently call fat rebel turrets do. Rey is a turret that wants arc, Nymranda wants arc but could also kite very effectively and Dash wants to arcdodge. The only other archetype that shares those definitions is Ghost Fenn.

There are really more difference in how "3 imperials" and "palpaces" were playing rather than in how a "Rey+" and "Dash+" plays?

In my experiences with triple aces, palp aces, and defenders there was some differences especially when it cane to defenders vs aces. Same with triple jumps vs jumps plus 1. And all the Attani variants had some subtle differences, but are still the same general archetype. The winner at Birmingham with Kylo/QD/Epsilon Ace is a triple aces list. I wouldn’t consider it all that similar in gameplay to the QD/Inq/Yorr palp aces variant or QD/Omega Leader/Yorr or Inquisitor/Major Rhymer/Yorr or whatever other palp aces variant is floating around.

Nymranda might be a little different from the other day turrets due to its inclusion of bombs but Dash/Rey/Ghost are all, at least to me, the same general archetype. They play a little differently, but so do the different imp aces/defenders/palp variants. I’m ok with clumping all the imp ace variants and Attani variants and lists with jumpmasters together for meta analysis actually, I just think it’d be only fair to also clump the fat turret variants for the purpose of evaluating a meta if we’re clumping the other general categories together.

4 hours ago, Tlfj200 said:

My lack of fun is because lists with turrets, regen and bombs are the dominant strategy, which diminish the importance of dials. I prefer when arcs are a dominant strategy (which emphasizes dials).

To elaborate - a turret obviously cares about it's dial, but it doesn't care about it's arc: it only cares about it's opponent's arcs so that it doesn't get shot.

I’ve heard this a few times, and you are still super in an arced mindset (I am too). But I’m pretty sure the majority of games are against turreted opponents.

Thats one of the big reasons for lone wolf dash, right? Super Dash is great against arced ships, but when you both have turrets you just want to stack defense modifiers. You’re either both shooting or neither, and no one cares about arcs, just distance and obstruction.

Edit: that is to say, you are rarely caring about your opponents arc because they also brought a big Turret.

3 hours ago, Sunitsa said:

• 16% Ghost Fenn
• 9% Palpaces
• 8% Dash+
• 7% Nymranda
• 7% Rey+
• 6% Triple Imperial

Am I really the only who sees more variety here?

Yes...? Because what I see is

• 16% Fat Rebel Turret
• 9% Imp Aces
• 8% Fat Rebel Turret
• 7% Fat Rebel Turret
• 7% Fat Rebel Turret
• 6% Imp Aces

So...over/under on us actually getting a FAQ before Worlds?

1 minute ago, defkhan1 said:

So...over/under on us actually getting a FAQ before Worlds?

Based on the most recent article, nil

I was quite bored today, stuck in the middle of nowhere IL today for work, so I manually checked all listjuggler tournaments over 50 participants since Feb 25 that had a top cut (excludes the Hyperspace Qualifier at Birmingham) and roughly categorized the lists in the cut by type.

100 point ace is all of the 3 ship Corran/Miranda/Norra led rebel variants, almost always with Low and Ezra or Fenn. I lumped all the Ace+2 gunboats, 3BQD, quad gunboat, etc lists just as Gunboats. If that is too generic for you then Rey+ or Asajj+ makes the top 52.71% of the cut and Gunboats gets split into 2-3 different categories that are out of the top half.

You can move a couple tenths of a percent here or there by discounting a couple lists I counted as part of categories that were kinda borderline. Biggest drop would be trip aces to 20 lists (5.41%) discounting the couple of trip defender and 2x defender+other lists. Not all lists were filled out, particularly in the top 64 cut at Birmingham where 20 lists of the cut were missing, so if those get filled in the numbers can change a little. Enjoy, feel free to let me know if you spot any mistakes or come up with different numbers.

Total cut lists: 370

Top 55.41%
12.70% 100pt Ace: 47* (44+ 1xThane/Low/Jess, 1xBraylen/Low/Wookie, 1xChewbacca/Low/Ezra)
11.62% GhostFenn: 43 (Also 2x Ghost/Low, not counted)
8.11% Palp Aces: 30* (29+ 1xKylo pilot shuttle w/ palp and Blackout)
8.11% Nymranda: 30
8.11% Gunboats: 30* (29 3-4 ship lists with Gunboats, 1 QD+3x TIE Bombers)
6.76% Trip Imp Ace: 25* (20+5x 3 ship with TIE Defenders lists)

Remainder:

5.41% Rey+: 20
5.41% Asajj+: 20
3.24% Dash+: 12* (11+ 1xDash/GSP/Ahsoka)
2.97% Rebel Nym, no Mir: 11
2.97% Rebel 4 ship: 11
2.16% RAClo+Ace: 8
1.89% Scum Nym 3 ship: 7
1.89% Trip Wookie: 7
1.35% Nym/Sol: 5
1.35% Dengar+ (no Asajj): 5
0.81% Brobots: 3

7.03% Misc: 26

1 minute ago, mdl0114 said:

0.81% Brobots: 3

The Jesper Hills outlier.

I see you.

5 minutes ago, Tlfj200 said:

The Jesper Hills outlier.

I see you.

There were 2 Control Bots and somewhere someone actually ran HLC, Glitter, Crack Shot B+C Bots into a cut. I was amazed to see 3 so I had to make them their own category. Also some weird outliers are 2x Oicunn lists, 1 triple Contracted Scout list (the Marcel Manzano outlier if we need a name), 1 Howlrunner (Ryad/Glaive/Howlrunner), and 1 triple B/SF squadron, plus the 4 Scouts list that Iain Hamp won the Las Vegas regional with.