10 hours ago, Boom Owl said:

On Top On Top?

You got me so excited there for a moment ?

2 hours ago, Mattman7306 said:

Wait yeah, the sub forums are above the main forums.

ITS OVER GUNBOAT, WE HAVE THE HIGH GROUND

Whatever floats your (gun)boat. ❤?

9 hours ago, unfassbarnathan said:

F

I agree

Holy reincarnation, Soontir Fel!

Awwww.... I don’t want to start over

8 minutes ago, tortugatron said:

Awwww.... I don’t want to start over

we can just add the thread lengths together for a symbolic victory

15 minutes ago, Mattman7306 said:

we can just add the thread lengths together for a symbolic victory

That sounds an awful lot like math...

Begun the clone wars has

man this got my hopes up for a second

I still agree, but this is a long way off and may actually kill the other very useful thread. Who volunteers to dig out and compile all the great on topic content from the original?

18 hours ago, Kaptin Krunch said:

So what analysis can we do on 2.0 squads without knowing point costs?

TIE Fighers still cost 24. How much would a PS 1 Striker have to cost to be comparable? 30? 34? 38?

- identify synergies and do practical testing. Eg. Leebo with 3P0. The asses if it’s cost effective later.

- test new mechanics for practicality. Reinforce, turret changes, etc. turrets on y wings might be worthless if we assess that move turret is too action inificient.

- take lists that had proven success and find which ones translate mechanically to 2.0. Eg. Commonwealth defenders, BBZZY, Paul’s Poe worlds list, etc.

2 hours ago, RynoZero said:

- identify synergies and do practical testing. Eg. Leebo with 3P0. The asses if it’s cost effective later.

- test new mechanics for practicality. Reinforce, turret changes, etc. turrets on y wings might be worthless if we assess that move turret is too action inificient.

- take lists that had proven success and find which ones translate mechanically to 2.0. Eg. Commonwealth defenders, BBZZY, Paul’s Poe worlds list, etc.

We can also do some generic testing with rule variants that aren’t clear yet. Veteran turret gunner on a y-wing: can you primary out the front and mobile out the front if your mobile is pointed forward? Try it either way if you can’t wait and then we have more information to judge things by once the rule book gets spoiled.

2 minutes ago, AEIllingworth said:

We can also do some generic testing with rule variants that aren’t clear yet. Veteran turret gunner on a y-wing: can you primary out the front and mobile out the front if your mobile is pointed forward? Try it either way if you can’t wait and then we have more information to judge things by once the rule book gets spoiled.

This is the type of testing I have been doing. Even if its completely wrong. Its more interesting to mess with than 1.0.

Alright, So how much more expensive than a striker does an interceptor need to be to be competitive? and what PS do you think?

Why was the thread moved to off-topic?

51 minutes ago, ScumDan said:

Why was the thread moved to off-topic?

It's not a story the mods would tell you. It's a Krayt legend. The original thread was a topic so powerful and so wise, it could use reason and experience to influence building of lists... it had such knowledge of win conditions, it could even declare ships and upgrades to be unplayable. The Krayt thread was a collection of many statements some consider to be... unnatural. But then it became so powerful,... the only thing it was afraid of was being moved to off-topic which eventually, of course, it was. Unfortunately, it taught its readers everything about s**t posting it knew, Then the readers posted it into the off-topic. Ironic. It could save other posters from the forum, but not itself.

9 hours ago, Do I need a Username said:

Alright, So how much more expensive than a striker does an interceptor need to be to be competitive? and what PS do you think?

I rather wonder if they will be near the same price. The Interceptor is more agile and has a better dial while the Striker can turn faster... Otherwise they are pretty similar in layout. Couple of points more?

The linked reposition on the interceptors means I will take two of them over three TIEs, and probably two of them over a defender. 36 is very competitive. 40 gets you five with no upgrades, which I’m still not against.

Using Nam-my’s Model, I’d say 40. 41 and I become very hesitant on an initiative 1. Up to 45 and they are still probably worth trying as filler.

Soontir, though? I’d absolutely take him over a base defender. I don’t think I’d go over 80, because you will want to fill a mod slot or two. Upper 70s seems reasonable. (I realize this means I think Vader is super undercosted in the demo lists).

3 hours ago, GreenDragoon said:

It's not a story the mods would tell you. It's a Krayt legend. The original thread was a topic so powerful and so wise, it could use reason and experience to influence building of lists... it had such knowledge of win conditions, it could even declare ships and upgrades to be unplayable. The Krayt thread was a collection of many statements some consider to be... unnatural. But then it became so powerful,... the only thing it was afraid of was being moved to off-topic which eventually, of course, it was. Unfortunately, it taught its readers everything about s**t posting it knew, Then the readers posted it into the off-topic. Ironic. It could save other posters from the forum, but not itself.

Thank you for this. There is hope that some day the forums will be fun again.

26 minutes ago, LagJanson said:

I rather wonder if they will be near the same price. The Interceptor is more agile and has a better dial while the Striker can turn faster... Otherwise they are pretty similar in layout. Couple of points more?

They have alot in common but that extra green dice will make the generic ones a bit more expensive definitely.

If 3 generic strikers can fit with Vader I would guess 3 Interceptors could to but with a little less room. The PS4 Interceptors probably wont be super cheap, so I am thinking more about a PS2 option.

5 hours ago, ScumDan said:

Why was the thread moved to off-topic?

They decided to face a mighty opponent, the Gunboat.

Which led to utter defeat.

*snicker* ?

2 hours ago, Boom Owl said:

They have alot in common but that extra green dice will make the generic ones a bit more expensive definitely.

If 3 generic strikers can fit with Vader I would guess 3 Interceptors could to but with a little less room. The PS4 Interceptors probably wont be super cheap, so I am thinking more about a PS2 option.

I concur with the generics, but I think and I4 striker would be more expensive than an I4 Interceptor because the striker has better reposition.

Just now, Do I need a Username said:

I concur with the generics, but I think and I4 striker would be more expensive than an I4 Interceptor because the striker has better reposition.

Im assuming the I4 Striker will be Sabacc. And that their will be an I1 and I3 generic striker. With countdown also at I3.

1 minute ago, Boom Owl said:

Im assuming the I4 Striker will be Sabacc. And that their will be an I1 and I3 generic striker. With countdown also at I3.

That seems correct, and in that case maybe even more expensive.

4 hours ago, Arma Quattro said:

They decided to face a mighty opponent, the Gunboat.

Which led to utter defeat.

*snicker* ?

So you agree that the only way you guys can win is if FFG banishes us? That's pretty sad tbh