2 hours ago, Kdubb said:

Sniped from the Polish Nationals thread from @Oldpara

Every list but the following have either Dengar (6), Lowhhrick (6), Rebel Nym (6), Scum Nym (5), Miranda (5), Biggs (4), or Quickdraw (4).

3. Lukasz Knade (Leebo Poe)

11. Karol Pietrowicz (RAC Inkwizytor)

12. Lukasz Jagalski (Nora, Braylen, Pava)

13. Piotrek Nitka (Ketsu, Asajj, Inaldra Mindlink) (DROP)

18. Riku Maenpaa (3 Defenders with crackshots)

19. Kacper Mojsym (4x Azutick +Wookiee Commandos)

25. Marcin Naprawski (crack swarm 7 TIE)

Crackshot Defenders!

Respect.

Baltic Nationals on yesterday ended with victory of Maciej Rz from Poland with Rey + Miranda. Having played a game during Swiss against him - that was some amazing flying!

Second was Nym + Miranda. Top 4 had also Biggs+Norra+Braylen and YV-666 + Nym + Y-wing. Not sure about the lists, sadly.

Juggler

http://lists.starwarsclubhouse.com/get_tourney_details?tourney_id=3424

So we finally got our first non-Nym winners, and would you look at that? It's another Twin Fat Turret list and then a bloody Wolfpack. To quote a certain fictional clown, I'd laugh if it weren't so pathetic.

11 minutes ago, DR4CO said:

So we finally got our first non-Nym winners, and would you look at that? It's another Twin Fat Turret list and then a bloody Wolfpack. To quote a certain fictional clown, I'd laugh if it weren't so pathetic.

What do we think the over/under is on a non-Turret list winning a Nationals this season.

If I said 1, would you pick under (0 non Turret lists will win a Nats), or over (at least 2 non Turret list will win a Nats).

14 minutes ago, DR4CO said:

So we finally got our first non-Nym winners, and would you look at that? It's another Twin Fat Turret list and then a bloody Wolfpack. To quote a certain fictional clown, I'd laugh if it weren't so pathetic.

But don't you love playing against fat-turrets and jumpmasters? Play your cards right and you might get matched up against Dengar, a fat-turret Jumpmaster. Wouldn't that be fun!

1 hour ago, DodgingArcs said:

What do we think the over/under is on a non-Turret list winning a Nationals this season.

If I said 1, would you pick under (0 non Turret lists will win a Nats), or over (at least 2 non Turret list will win a Nats).

Of the two options I would pick 0 wins over 2 wins. The idea of 2 non-turret lists winning the remaining nationals is a long shot, if for no other reason than the number of lists with no turret that are at all relevant in the meta being very low. If you set the over/under at 0.5 it's more interesting. There's a chance that 1 national gets won by a fairship list or other non-turreted list, 2 wins is a really long shot with 4 events already in the bag.

Yeah turrets now dominate the meta's in most places. And trying non turret ships is hard.

Turrets are too dominant right now.

Fair Ship has already been dumped down to tier II because it can't handle the turrets and bombs. But nothing can.

I think there's a good chance we'll see a clean sweep by various turrets, at least of 'major' nationals. It's simply too much of a handicap to play with a firing arc.

...

6 hours ago, DR4CO said:

So we finally got our first non-Nym winners, and would you look at that? It's another Twin Fat Turret list and then a bloody Wolfpack. To quote a certain fictional clown, I'd laugh if it weren't so pathetic.

This.

Why spend a turn or two lining up that kill shot when you can shoot every round? Plus launch ordinance? Plus have lots of HP? Plus have lots of mods? This is a simple game design flaw that bends the top lists naturally to include them. There's no logical rational to fly arc-ed ships if winning is your desire.

....depressing actually.

38 minutes ago, HammerOfReason said:

Categorization of lists into Turret/Non-Turret is too much of a generalization though.

Many lists today employ a toolbox approach with multiple types of ships bundled together.

RAC+Ace or Rau Boats both include turret(s) in the list, but they also have arcs and the Ace is an important component of the list.

Many other squads use turret as a secondary threat, e.g. Torp Scouts or Scum Nym with Autoblaster.

A much more informative categorization would be based on ship-level than on the squad-level, with more nuances of the turret usage accounted for.

But that more rational view is indeed not what the nerf crowds are interested in.

Partly true. There are multiple desirable traits that the top ships are being selected for and the turret is only one of them.

However, it's also true that the best counter to these successful traits turns out to be... those traits.

That's the real problem. It doesn't matter what the mechanic is that's dominating, any time where the best viable counters to [A Thing] are [More Of That Thing] you'll rapidly create a degenerate metagame state. If aces were really good and the best answer to aces was more aces it would be ****, just as it would be if the best answer to powerful swarms was more swarms.

Tough ships with turrets (and often bombs) are dominant. The best answer to tough ships with turrets and bombs turns out to be... tough ships with turrets and bombs.

Maybe it's stupid, but I really miss Commonwealth Defenders + Parattanni meta Probably it's personal but I find so many turrets and bombs obnoxious

bombs are a lot more difficult to abuse without turrets

****, bombs have been maligned for the longest time while turrets have been a pain in the furthest reaches of the *** since wave 5 heralded the dark days of x-wing through when they were only curtailed by...TLT before jumps came to steamroll everything

The current turret rules really do not belong in a game about positioning and maneuvering; they're just literally infinetly easier to fly. Bombs require positioning to land and can be dodged via positioning, not counting the pre-activation ACTION bombs which have at least been hinted at being curtailed via the gunboat's reprint of ASLAM

but anyway, given the massive jump in difficulty there is between landing shots with an arced ship (while keeping position of all other ships, obstacles, and all potential manuevers in mind) v with a turret, it really is baffling how little arced ships get to incentivize their use

Well, everyone wanted Nym to not win, and so we are back to triple jumps. Woot. Bring back wave 3!

I haven't seen anyone posting results from Polish Nationals so here it is:

Winner

Jan Świrski (Rebel)

Miranda - TLT, C3PO

Lowrick - Rey, Tactician, Trickshot

Rebel Operative (PS2 HWK) - TLT, Moldy Crow, Chewbacca

Runner Up

Paweł Pafawag (Rebel)

Dash - HLC, Outrider, Lone Wolf, Rey, BMST

Miranda - TLT, Sabine, EM, Cluster Mines, Bomblet, Adv. SLAM

TOP 4

LEEBO! - HLC, Outrider, Lone Wolf, Rey, Countermesures

Poe PS9, - Title, AT, Comm Relay, Intensity, R2D2

Corran - Adv Sens, Engine, Push, R2d2d

Nym - VI, TLT, Adv Sens, Bomblett, Genius, Engine

42 minutes ago, ficklegreendice said:

bombs are a lot more difficult to abuse without turrets

****, bombs have been maligned for the longest time while turrets have been a pain in the furthest reaches of the *** since wave 5 heralded the dark days of x-wing through when they were only curtailed by...TLT before jumps came to steamroll everything

The current turret rules really do not belong in a game about positioning and maneuvering; they're just literally infinetly easier to fly. Bombs require positioning to land and can be dodged via positioning, not counting the pre-activation ACTION bombs which have at least been hinted at being curtailed via the gunboat's reprint of ASLAM

but anyway, given the massive jump in difficulty there is between landing shots with an arced ship (while keeping position of all other ships, obstacles, and all potential manuevers in mind) v with a turret, it really is baffling how little arced ships get to incentivize their use

Yeah I definitely agree on this. There was a time when the HLC was feared for its 4 dice attack, but the TLT which costs less and covers 450% more firing area actually does an equivalent amount of damage. No incentive for the HLC.

Bombs are at least interesting. I don't love the rules for them, especially the action bombs, but in a way, dropping them behind you should force repositional ships into arcs, of course that doesn't matter because turrets equal arc all the time.

Bombs in general may involve positioning to a degree, but not the bombs we see used. Those seem to be in one of three flavors. Advanced SLAM K-Wing (Miranda) action bombs, genius+advanced sensors+PS 10 Nym reveal bombs, and infinite no-consequence reveal bombs without genius (bomblet on Miranda).

These bombs are either the next best thing to unavoidable with SLAM action bomb Miranda and genius bomblet Nym, or can just be dropped every turn for giggles, or both for Nym with bomblet. And as ficklegreendice said the bombs used all come paired with turrets so that the ships using bombs can optimize their movement for bombing and still shoot.

It doesn't make much sense to complain about AdvSLAM "Action:" bombs and about the ships being turrets and still being able to shoot.

Bomblet Generator on Nym is a serious problem. Bomblet Generator on Miranda is a minor problem. AdvSLAM "Action:" bombs are a minor problem.

Guess what gets "fixed"? Yeah ... Advanced SLAM. RIP, Advanced SLAM.

The correct fix? Errata SLAM reference card: "The SLAM maneuver must be the same speed and bearing as the revealed maneuver." Possibly: "The SLAM maneuver must be a 2-speed maneuver." Either would be fine, really.

But nope ... FFG finally embraces errata on upgrade cards. To use it in the most ham-fisted way possible. Because that's X-Wing development.

I see the problem in combining turrets with bombs. But those two are so deeply connected in the game and lore that I don't see it changing.
At least autoblaster+bomb allows you to stay at longer range - TLT punishes it, hard.

Another problem is of course high PS and reveal bombs.
At least this requires to correctly guess the end position + 2.5 ship lengths - which is a really large area.

And one more is advanced sensors and bombs.
This needs actions to adjust the manevuer. It makes the previous two points much easier, but at least at a cost.

All of those would be bad but ok-ish with a limited amount of bombs - even though 4 are a lot! (I still wonder how many rounds of shooting the average ship gets...)
But bomblet generator means that the bomber does only have to check with himself whether he will bomb his own ships. And to top it off the prime bomber that already combines all of those can either ignore damage from his own bombs, or keep them from exploding.

But back to my pre-rant point: How bad are limited bombs without Nym if they are not combined with turrets? Even at high PS, with Advanced Sensors and repositioning actions? Probably very far from good - Punishers were not a thing and still are not. Yes they lack the EPT for VI. But I am convinced that the turret is what makes bombs working.

With Miranda advanced SLAM it's more that she combines the steady, non-arc requiring damage of TLT (and a PWT for her donut hole) with unavoidable SLAM action bombs, not that she's going to do both in one turn obviously. She also combines point fortressing and regen, so there's a whole lot that goes into Miranda being arguably the best ship/pilot in the game. And I agree, the major problem is the combo of Nym/Bomblet/Genius/Adv Sensors. Though I think Adv SLAM action bombs are more than a minor problem they aren't Nym level.

I wonder if the Advanced SLAM change is going to push the same lists with Miranda/Nym or Miranda/Dash to find the 1 point for an experimental interface since Miranda still has everything else going for her and just loses advanced slam. Kinda a tangent though, don't want to dive too far down the rabbit hole in here.

23 minutes ago, Jeff Wilder said:

It doesn't make much sense to complain about AdvSLAM "Action:" bombs and about the ships being turrets and still being able to shoot.

Bomblet Generator on Nym is a serious problem. Bomblet Generator on Miranda is a minor problem. AdvSLAM "Action:" bombs are a minor problem.

Guess what gets "fixed"? Yeah ... Advanced SLAM. RIP, Advanced SLAM.

The correct fix? Errata SLAM reference card: "The SLAM maneuver must be the same speed and bearing as the revealed maneuver." Possibly: "The SLAM maneuver must be a 2-speed maneuver." Either would be fine, really.

But nope ... FFG finally embraces errata on upgrade cards. To use it in the most ham-fisted way possible. Because that's X-Wing development.

I disagree that advanced SLAM + action bombs are minor problems. We saw them help push out low health Aces. Yes, this current Nym is a little more worrying, but SLAMing bombers aren't a minor problem.

...

6 minutes ago, mdl0114 said:

I wonder if the Advanced SLAM change is going to push the same lists with Miranda/Nym or Miranda/Dash to find the 1 point for an experimental interface since Miranda still has everything else going for her and just loses advanced slam.

Yes, that will probably happen. EI costs and extra point, and leaves Miranda stressed (which is fairly major). On the other hand, EI also allows dropping the bomb even if the SLAM maneuver doesn't fit. That's not a huge buff, but it's a buff.

1 minute ago, SabineKey said:

I disagree that advanced SLAM + action bombs are minor problems. We saw them help push out low health Aces. Yes, this current Nym is a little more worrying, but SLAMing bombers aren't a minor problem.

No, they really are a minor problem. Low-HP aces are being held down by much more than AdvS bombs. Nerfing AdvS into oblivion is going to have exactly zero effect on the return of aces. (I.e., barring major other changes, they're not going to return.)

Even so, I'm still advocating for a nerf to SLAM ... just not for a nerf-to-oblivion of Advanced SLAM.

7 minutes ago, Jeff Wilder said:

No, they really are a minor problem. Low-HP aces are being held down by much more than AdvS bombs. Nerfing AdvS into oblivion is going to have exactly zero effect on the return of aces. (I.e., barring major other changes, they're not going to return.)

Even so, I'm still advocating for a nerf to SLAM ... just not for a nerf-to-oblivion of Advanced SLAM.

So, removing a part of a problem is useless because other parts still exist? Making progress to bringing back an archetype shouldn't be done because it can't be totally done in one fell swoop?

Just because they are one in a list of problems doesn't mean they are minor. They, on their own, tips the scales of flying Aces from profitable to risky. Even with the other things holding Aces down, SLAMing Bombers are still a major problem.