6 minutes ago, kris40k said:

The nerfpocalypse that took out Palp, Manaroo, and similar states otherwise. FFG is listening to the playerbase.

But was that due to online saber-rattling or their first hand experience of and analysis of tournament results?

I really appreciatethe perspective that Biophysical is putting forward here that expensive ships should stomp ships (one on one) that are 10 to 15 points less expensive. It's common sense but I think that gets lost somehow.

Last store championship I went to I beat a Miranda/Num list 100-26 with my Biggs/Norra/Auzituck list. It was a brain drain but very doable.

9 minutes ago, E Chu Ta said:

Absolutely untrue. The reason NPE is constantly misapplied is because it suggests not a personal experience, but a shared one.

Yes, it is misapplied as shared experience. But it's a personal experience that's shared among many people and that is a small but important difference in one sense:
calling something an NPE does not make it more widespread, but a widespread negative experience shared among many people makes it an NPE. But wrong usage of a word on the internet is hardly anything new.

14 minutes ago, E Chu Ta said:

The term is used to weight any individual's experience as more than one, as some kind of community gestalt, which even if it was a thing, I hardly think this board would be representative of. Just say, "This happened, I didn't like it, does anyone feel the same, how can I adapt so it doesn't get me again, etc..."

But that's exactly what calling it an NPE does - it communicates a negative experience for a person and suggests that it might be widespread.

The problem is when colloquial usage changes from a question mark to an explanation mark - Do many people feel that way? vs Many people do feel that way!
The latter can be legitimate IF (and that's a large if!) it was previously established well enough. Of course that's rarely the case, and hence the former is usually the only meaningful use of NPE

@E Chu Ta, @FTS Gecko, @SabineKey It is true its a bit of a jump to assume online forums, podcasts, and other social media was the sole cause of the changes; in fact, I did not mean to imply it was only forum *********** that did it. Sorry if that came across wrong. Tournament data is much more concrete to work with, however social media is a great source for developers to keep a finger on the pulse on the playerbase experience; its the canary in the coalmine, so to speak. You can then examine hard data and take more controlled interviews to see if there are any issues that need to be addressed.

2 minutes ago, kris40k said:

@E Chu Ta, @FTS Gecko, @SabineKey It is true its a bit of a jump to assume online forums, podcasts, and other social media was the sole cause of the changes; in fact, I did not mean to imply it was only forum *********** that did it. Sorry if that came across wrong. Tournament data is much more concrete to work with, however social media is a great source for developers to keep a pulse on the playerbase experience; its the canary in the coalmine, so to speak.

That is true. More data is always best. The tournament data should have the most weight, but there can be things it misses (like possibly Kylo) that doesn't really raise any flags in tournaments, so looking to social media outlets for hints isn't a bad thing.

Could you guys take this NPE discussion to a new thread? It really has no bearing on the OP.

11 minutes ago, Biophysical said:

Could you guys take this NPE discussion to a new thread? It really has no bearing on the OP.

I don't know. You asserted that Nym was not NPE and is fine, balanced, and healthy for the game in your OP. They're contending that Nym is NPE and OP - and discussing how NPE/OP are related. Seems relevant to me.

39 minutes ago, Scumwing Apologist said:

I don't know. You asserted that Nym was not NPE and is fine, balanced, and healthy for the game in your OP. They're contending that Nym is NPE and OP - and discussing how NPE/OP are related. Seems relevant to me.

You clearly haven't read that or my subsequent clarifying comments very closely.

Edit: specifically see page 6 of this thread.

1 hour ago, Thormind said:

Considering the intent of the site is to compile data based on standard 100 pts tournament, it's normal to not include the ones that are different. It's a "meta" annalyser. We play a 45pts format in my local area and Imperials are dominating (tks to Omega Leader). Doesnt mean they are good in the official format. Same reason why Epic events are not compiled as well.

Like i said the most played builds are already non arc dodgers. No Imperial builds won a major event since the FAQ came out. They keep droping in meta ranking. Rebels were in a much better position than Imperials are now. Yet you should have seen them complaining :-) Not complicated, most players i know prefer to play the fation they like and want to have an equal chance at winning.

Currently when you play Imperials you almost always start your games with an handicap. You need to play perfectly, be very lucky with your dices and hope that your opponent makes mistake. Assuming you both roll the same and both dont make mistake, your opponent will win. Thats not fun.

While the ETC wasn't the "standard" 100 pts tournaments due to the way pairings work, there were still 7 swiss 100 points game to be played.

And Empire did very well, to the point that the only 2 players who did 7-0 were actually flying imperial list. Are you really saying that those players started every game with an handicap or that they just got extremely lucky (it might be worth to point out again that those 7 games were played against some of the best players in Europe)?

Right now Empire is less rapresented in tournaments, yet there are archetypes that are actually doing well on the mats. At the Europeans (not the ETC) there were 2 different RAC+ace lists in top8 (and both were arc-dodging lists for what is worth).

There weren't that many major events after the FAQ. We had some SoSs but theyhappened so close to the FAQ that many imperial players weren't ready (and no imperial won any SoS even before that, it was just Parattanni), the Europeans (which as I said saw fewer Empire lists than any other factions and still had 2 of them in the top8) and the ETC (in which, as I said Empire rocked).

The biggest difference is that successful imperial lists seem less copied than successful rebel and scum ones. Try flying sensor cluster QD+Backdraft+Stealth Device Zeta Leader, QD+Vessery+PalpaYorr, Jax+Bren+QD or PalpaRAC+ion pulse, then come back here and say again that Empire starts games handicapped

I agree with the OP.

Game design in the books, some ships we have are able to outperform their point invested against certain lists (QD) but are average against others.

Some ships give you exactly what you pay for against most lists, but have that counter floating out there to make you feel you wasted your points every once in a while (Nym).

Now and then, though, you run across a ship or list that can seemingly do no wrong against anything they face (JM5k, Sergeant Biggles Lonely Hearts Club Band...Err FSR).

We don't often see the first set of ships, especially early in a meta season, unless that thing they like to do is prevalent in the meta. They come later as more people explore and discover things.

The second set we see very often, until the first set starts to show up.

The third set spreads like wildfire as net lists and floods the competitive scene until either a nerf or a first set counterplay is identified. But if that counterplay is required for success and costs a lot of your list when you aren't flying the third set, then we get the wave 5 meta all over again.

QD is cheap and allows you most of your list to have fun when facing Nym/most lists. As long as your list can also beat fsr on a good day, you've probably got a good imp list for this meta.

What I'm curious about after reading the thread is how everyone quantifies the value of a point in their list as they build it. Obviously the math-wingers use ouija boards, but is everyone else so granular?

An example: Someone called death rain a waste of points earlier in the thread. If you've got your QD and your Git Er Done Ace and have the points left over, it would seem benificial to throw something unexpected at your opponents. Nobody practices against a punisher, so if you're good with it that's got to add some value to his points. Just as a pair of strikers can distract your opponent in other ways when you know how to use them.

(Alternate context for the example: Back before x-wings were fixed and they were ".01% less jousting efficient than b-wings", could you really prove it on the table? Did you though?)

16 minutes ago, ViscerothSWG said:

An example: Someone called death rain a waste of points earlier in the thread. If you've got your QD and your Git Er Done Ace and have the points left over, it would seem benificial to throw something unexpected at your opponents. Nobody practices against a punisher, so if you're good with it that's got to add some value to his points. Just as a pair of strikers can distract your opponent in other ways when you know how to use them.

HAHA MY SECRET WEAPON! THE DREADED PUNISHER BUILD THAT NO ONE PRACTICES AGAINST! YOUR INEXPERIENCE WILL BE YOUR UNDOING, PUNY MORTALS! BRB WHILE I PAINT MY SQUAD WITH SKULLS AND GET MY COSPLAY READY! WORLDS HERE I COME!

1 minute ago, Scumwing Apologist said:

HAHA MY SECRET WEAPON! THE DREADED PUNISHER BUILD THAT NO ONE PRACTICES AGAINST! YOUR INEXPERIENCE WILL BE YOUR UNDOING, PUNY MORTALS! BRB WHILE I PAINT MY SQUAD WITH SKULLS AND GET MY COSPLAY READY! WORLDS HERE I COME!

Deathrain is OP yo.

You laugh @ScumwingApologist, but i did just that at a store champ. Only reason i lost was because i did a dumb, not because i got outplayed. Midway through my activation i went "Oh crap im an idiot CRAAP" *hits a rock* "...i was twisted a bit...right..forgot about that"

Deathrain cause so much havoc because nobody was used to that thing's mobility with bombletts/adv sensors. And frontbombs tend to catch people off guard a lot more than genius does imo

3 hours ago, Thormind said:

It is actually an unbiased chart, it just compile tournament results and rank ships based on them. The mathematical formula used to rank the ships is on the web page. It is the most reliable source of data we have.

I know they are not. The reasons for that are quite simple:

- You cant arc dodge turrets

- Dodgers have high agi/low hull/shield. When dmg bypass agi or when dice creep gets so high, they cant survive long enough to be meaningful. Fenn was the exception because he did not have to survive that long to make an impact on a game.

...is currently false. You said yourself why they dont perform well and thats why the traditionnal Imperial aces (or arc dodgers) are not (or less) played. It's also why the ships with higher hull/shield are the only ones performing well.

Look at the chart?? You just said it yourself arc dodgers are nowhere to be found. Imperial players did adapt. The most played builds are with Tie/sf and Defenders. There is just no material avaible to the faction to compete with the OP stuff from Scums and Rebels.

Considering the intent of the site is to compile data based on standard 100 pts tournament, it's normal to not include the ones that are different. It's a "meta" annalyser. We play a 45pts format in my local area and Imperials are dominating (tks to Omega Leader). Doesnt mean they are good in the official format. Same reason why Epic events are not compiled as well.

Like i said the most played builds are already non arc dodgers. No Imperial builds won a major event since the FAQ came out. They keep droping in meta ranking. Rebels were in a much better position than Imperials are now. Yet you should have seen them complaining :-) Not complicated, most players i know prefer to play the fation they like and want to have an equal chance at winning.

Currently when you play Imperials you almost always start your games with an handicap. You need to play perfectly, be very lucky with your dices and hope that your opponent makes mistake. Assuming you both roll the same and both dont make mistake, your opponent will win. Thats not fun.

Since you decide to chop up the thread I have no other option than to present you with this meme.

You are not that clever, you just cry a lot.

3 hours ago, Vineheart01 said:

i have faced people that cried the Striker was op because it could "change its maneuver on a whim"
Yeah...to a small degree. Not like its impossible to catch and its not incredibly durable/killy either.

People complain about everything

WE need an X-wing fix, NOW FFG!

Biggs just took top of the championship.

FFG you need to NERF BIGGS NOW!!!!

Yeah from this point on, everyone that calls for a nerf is just one laser-brained scruffy-looking nerf-herder, that needs to nerf off and either shut up and play or go play a different game.

28 minutes ago, ViscerothSWG said:

I agree with the OP.

I like these thoughtful, well-reasoned points, though I will preempt more passionate hearts in saying that a sticking point is that Nym is consistently worth MORE than you pay for. I don't currently hold that opinion myself, but I get to smugly slip it in before the true haters. Little pleasures.

^Also that kid is radical.

4 minutes ago, Vineheart01 said:

You laugh @ScumwingApologist, but i did just that at a store champ. Only reason i lost was because i did a dumb, not because i got outplayed. Midway through my activation i went "Oh crap im an idiot CRAAP" *hits a rock* "...i was twisted a bit...right..forgot about that"

Deathrain cause so much havoc because nobody was used to that thing's mobility with bombletts/adv sensors. And frontbombs tend to catch people off guard a lot more than genius does imo

It's almost as if one of the worst dials in the game.......PUNISHED YOU!

*puts on sunglasses*

....I'll see myself out.

2 hours ago, E Chu Ta said:

I will preempt more passionate hearts in saying that a sticking point is that Nym is consistently worth MORE than you pay for. I don't currently hold that opinion myself, but I get to smugly slip it in before the true haters. Little pleasures.

I shall join you in preempting by preemptively replying that being "worth more than your cost" isn't terribly special anymore

See jugglers math wizardry on fairship for further examples

Although, apparently, the SCURRG is roughly as jousting efficient as a B.