On 28/01/2018 at 5:51 PM, SEApocalypse said:

To play 4 games a week you have to go to one of the many weekly or bi-weekly game nights in your local community. That's it. That is less of an commitment than most people would make when they join a sports club for example. If put in the effort to ask within the local community AND the global vassal community you should be able to play 100 games with easy per month, so availability of other players does not seem like an issue. It still a change in your lifestyle for sure, basically you are getting into a competitive sports lifestyle, just without the health benefits. ;-)

Though even 8 games per week are still reasonable small changes. Playing one vassal game each evening instead of watching entertainment media and having 2 practise sessions of 2 games each evening in your store is not a high bar to reach. Compared to most esports games it's an incredible low bar to to reach. What it does require is some organisation talent as well, because you need manage your game schedule with several practise partners most likely. (Unless you can play at home with family and friends each evening anyway, not that would be indeed a lucky case)

In a metropolitan centre of US or European standards this is totally true, but other countries lack the player base in large swathes of territory for it to be really possible. I'm in a regional Australian city, and we have - at most - 15 players, and typically only 3-4 for our game nights. I can't make the Friday one for family reasons, and Tuesday I leave early for "actual sport" training. I can get in two games a week like this pretty reliably, and Vassal covers the rest if I've got the time.

However, If I lived where I did 4 years ago (45 minute drive away), I'd have internet too poor for Vassal and literally no other players within 20 kilometres of me, meaning that 4 games a week would be an enormous struggle. There are numerous other corner cases where the time sacrifice is incredibly hard, such as someone who works a night shift or has a large family to cook for.

The tournament results from the past weekend continue to prove that with the correction of Trajectory Simulator, the meta is wonderfully healthy and diverse, with both established lists and completely new brews showing up in the top tables in equal measure. There is no longer a boogeyman list that is guaranteeing wins against the entire field.

So if you're losing, it's either because your list building skills aren't good enough, or you're not as skilled a pilot as you think you are, or some combination of the two. But you can't claim you're being oppressed by List X, because the tournament results aren't showing that to be true.

Some people posting in this forum probably need to read this as well: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning–Kruger_effect

Its easy to fall into the cognitive dissonance trap of "Im a skilled player, but I lost, therefore the lists that I lost to must be broken and unbeatable by my fair list and clearly above average skills!" But as I said, Rogue lists keep doing well at Regionals along side the meta lists if you look at recent data, so obviously that conclusion is a false one, the meta lists aren't unbeatable.

Note that only one side in this debate explicitly claims to be "more skilled" than the other. I personally think the truly good players let the results speak for themselves, and don't blame luck or other players for their lack of results.

3 minutes ago, Tvboy said:

The tournament results from the past weekend continue to prove that with the correction of Trajectory Simulator, the meta is wonderfully healthy and diverse, with both established lists and completely new brews showing up in the top tables in equal measure. There is no longer a boogeyman list that is guaranteeing wins against the entire field.

So if you're losing, it's either because your list building skills aren't good enough, or you're not as skilled a pilot as you think you are, or some combination of the two. But you can't claim you're being oppressed by List X, because the tournament results aren't showing that to be true.

IMO it's too early to claim the meta is healthy and diverse. We've only had one week-end post FAQ, and dominant lists rarely appear immediately after a meta shake-up. It's entirely possible in a month's time the meta will be again dominated by something.

Well then we better enjoy it while we can instead of just waiting for its supposedly inevitable downfall.

14 hours ago, Tvboy said:

The tournament results from the past weekend continue to prove that with the correction of Trajectory Simulator, the meta is wonderfully healthy and diverse, with both established lists and completely new brews showing up in the top tables in equal measure. There is no longer a boogeyman list that is guaranteeing wins against the entire field.

So if you're losing, it's either because your list building skills aren't good enough, or you're not as skilled a pilot as you think you are, or some combination of the two. But you can't claim you're being oppressed by List X, because the tournament results aren't showing that to be true.

Some people posting in this forum probably need to read this as well: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning–Kruger_effect

Its easy to fall into the cognitive dissonance trap of "Im a skilled player, but I lost, therefore the lists that I lost to must be broken and unbeatable by my fair list and clearly above average skills!" But as I said, Rogue lists keep doing well at Regionals along side the meta lists if you look at recent data, so obviously that conclusion is a false one, the meta lists aren't unbeatable.

Note that only one side in this debate explicitly claims to be "more skilled" than the other. I personally think the truly good players let the results speak for themselves, and don't blame luck or other players for their lack of results.

It's an amazing improvement, and I have to credit FFG for nipping it at the bud, unlike JM5Ks and Palp Aces. It's still possible to lose because of truly poor luck, but nobody counts their rolls so it's subjective claims only there.

The Dunning - Kruger effect is quite brutal, but captures the essence of the scrub perfectly. Rogue lists backed by incredible players definitely make up for the boon provided by meta lists, but you won't see tier 3 lists taking anything. The biggest advantage of off-the-wall lists is their surprise element, so you can typically force the opponents to make mistakes due to their inexperience. At some point your list just won't have the firepower to kill Miranda/Dash/Nym if you play too far from the meta.