I've been hearing a lot lately about how people are just handicapping themselves by playing "meme lists," which I guess means anything that people haven't seen on MetaWing before. It's really starting to bug me. NOT FLYING META =/= FLYING WITH A HANDICAP, FOLKS. Refusing to run certain ships on principle? Yeah, that's a competitive handicap, and it's more likely to make you frustrated than anything. But playing something that's not Nymranda? That is NOT a frickin' handicap. ****, for a lot of people, it's probably a good thing. You surprise your opponents; that's a competitive advantage. You probably have more fun, which in my book is a competitive advantage by itself, because if you enjoy the game you're playing, if you're more engaged, you're gonna win more. But more than that, you gotta play to your playstyle. I flew Corran Miranda last year and it was the worst competitive season I've ever had; I would've done better with four **** Rebel jousters, because that's what I know how to play, even though it was a worst list. Nathan flies Corran. Blair flies generics. Fly what you're good at.

Make your squad the best it can be, but make it your squad. Don't go netlisting **** just so you're not "playing meme lists." Don't play toxic **** just to play toxic ****. Figure out what style of play you're best at, and then do that. Don't shame people for running meta lists, but goddamn can we stop shaming people for not playing meta lists? You do that and the game never changes.

Alright, rant over. Fly casual and party on, dudes.

The other day, two Friends of mine were in a match. One flyed Nymranda. The other flyed Kimogila with Dalan Oberos, 4-Lom in G1A starfighter, and Viktor Hel in Khiraxz, just because he wanted to fly a stress-spam list and seem funny to him.

My friend with the stress-spam list beated Nymranda. With a very casual list.

He flyed better just because his list was more funny to him than nymranda to its adversary.

If certain players out there feel they need to lean on a meta crutch to improve their tournament chances then that's up to them, but there's plenty of players out there happy to fly without the internet training wheels.

Totally gonna run Kylo with 3 TIE F/O's cause thematic play is how I have fun and they are good little ships.

There's a difference between 'not flying meta' and 'handicapping' yourself. Creating a "GOOD" list that isn't meta is very hard, but can be done if you can read the meta correctly and make the right decisions. Creating a list that is handicapping you means it's a list you know is not up to the same level and flying it anyway. It means you have to make MORE correct decisions on the map and hope your opponent is not up to your skill level.

The problem with playing the obvious meta hotness is that lots of other people will. If you're an average player that means there's a good chance at any sufficiently large tournament that you'll face other, better players using the same list, which is a good way to lose. You'll probably get some extra wins, of course, by virtue of using the meta list against those who haven't taken it. You also have to account for those running counters to your list. Since you're running a powerful, well-known list, and you're an average player, you could end up losing to better players who have worse lists because they are well prepared for your list.

Personally, I tend to avoid taking the meta lists while always trying to take a list I think at least has a chance against them. I'm rarely the best player in the room so I figure I'll lose my fair share of mirror matches against similar lists run by better players but maybe I can tilt the odds in my favour by running a decent counter list. Also, many of the meta lists can be quite dull to play and if you're facing 4-6 games of X-Wing in a single day you might want something a little more exciting to keep your attention.

9 minutes ago, impspy said:

Totally gonna run Kylo with 3 TIE F/O's cause thematic play is how I have fun and they are good little ships.

Wouldn't two SFs be more thematic (and canon)

11 minutes ago, Erion_Fett said:

The other day, two Friends of mine were in a match. One flyed Nymranda. The other flyed Kimogila with Dalan Oberos, 4-Lom in G1A starfighter, and Viktor Hel in Khiraxz, just because he wanted to fly a stress-spam list and seem funny to him.

My friend with the stress-spam list beated Nymranda. With a very casual list.

He flyed better just because his list was more funny to him than nymranda to its adversary.

Did you consider that maybe he won because he's a significantly better player?

2 minutes ago, ficklegreendice said:

Wouldn't two SFs be more thematic (and canon)

That means I need another one...

15 minutes ago, LagJanson said:

There's a difference between 'not flying meta' and 'handicapping' yourself.

Probably important to note that you can quite easily "handicap yourself" by "flying meta". If you usually run Imperials then suddenly decide to drop the list you've been practicing with in favour of a Miranda/Nym (for example) at the last minute because "you saw it was doing well" online, then you might not be too pleased with the results.

Edit: @Jike said it better than I did; in mirror matches especially the advantage will go to the player with the greater experience running said lists.

3 minutes ago, ficklegreendice said:

Wouldn't two SFs be more thematic (and canon)

Have you tried fitting Kylo in with two even semi-decent /sfs? Assuming you mean Silencer Kylo that is. It is not pretty.

FWIW, not flying with the meta in mind IS often handicapping yourself. It's not just about flying the meta, but knowing what's in it and how you plan on handling it when you see it.

It's one thing not to fly the current fashionable netlist, it's quite another to stick your fingers in your ears and pretend it doesn't exist.

There are simply some ships that cannot hang in the current environment. There are straight up more efficient uses of points. 4 wookies is better than 4 B's. A Tie SF is going to be stronger than an Interceptor. Shadowcaster is a better chassis than the firespray. Kwing and Scurrg are straight up better than the Punisher. Awings while fun, can't push through enough damage. And so on.

If you aren't getting the most value out of the points you use, then yes you are handicapping yourself. It's possible to fly "your own thing" and still be efficient about it.

Would flying Soontir + Kylo only for a regional be a meme list or a handicap?

Asking for a friend.

2 minutes ago, thespaceinvader said:

Have you tried fitting Kylo in with two even semi-decent /sfs? Assuming you mean Silencer Kylo that is. It is not pretty.

Exactly. Basic Zetas (FCS, Title, and LWF) come out to 27 points each, which with PTL Kylo puts me at 101 Squad Points. Now, I could run VI Kylo but I prefer PTL and even so I don't think they'll do better than 3 TIE F/O's since they lack any tech or missiles.

Just now, viedit said:

If you aren't getting the most value out of the points you use, then yes you are handicapping yourself. It's possible to fly "your own thing" and still be efficient about it.

Yup. Exactly this. You gotta be flexible about what you want to fly, but don't just go meta. I fly four ship Rebels. When I started playing, that was B-Wings and X-Wings. Now, it's Wookiees and Stressbugs and Sexy Rexy. And also an X-Wing, but, ya know, Jess. It's the best list I can make that still fits my playstyle.

19 minutes ago, impspy said:

Totally gonna run Kylo with 3 TIE F/O's cause thematic play is how I have fun and they are good little ships.

See, now I definitely applaud you for running something that's thematic and fun; but at the same time, if you're planning on going to some big tournament, you would want to have a broader mindset. If "thematic" is a decent enough definition, you have a lot of options, like Rey Poe, or Kylo, Quickdraw, and an /fo, for example; in a competitive setting, you want to play the best version of that you can find.

There are two arguments that are being mixed. One is descriptive, whether it‘s handicapping or not, and the other is normative, whether that is good or bad.

I have to disagree with many here. And as disclaimer: I love list building, and I flew imperial alpha with concussion before harpoons made it good and „meta“. I‘m also convinced that list building is an important part of the game and getting gud because it allows you to understand your opponents‘ list faster. I‘ve often spoken out against netlisting, but I think by now that it‘s less black&white than I used to think.

That being said: chances are high that you (the general you) are around as bad at listbuilding as I am. If one of us picks a list that was put together by a smarter person who put in more thought and understanda the game better, maybe ran some numbers, and so on... then the chances to win will improve compared to the self built list. That means necessarily that the person building a list themself will handicap themself compared to the person who netlists.

There is a lot to understand about the game, many mistakes to make. You‘ll most likely be pretty bad for quite some time. And during that time, netlisting a good list will allow you to focus on other things than listbuilding. It allows you to have a bit more fun while you make your mistakes. I assume some humility and honest introspection, but that missing will also be a handicap when flying self-built lists, so it should be clear without saying it.

I completely agree that you should stick to your personal style. I can‘t fly large ships with the exception of easy mode Dash, and I don‘t like them. That limits the number of lists I can netlist. But I will handicap myself if I fly my own idea of Poe, Jake and Stresshog/mule/bug. It‘s fun, it‘s maybe a surprise. And there are many reasons why Jake is not the best way to fly 27-33 points when you want to increase your chances of winning.

Not-netlisting most likely is a handicap. But:

that is ok!

You are not stupid for doing so. Personally I think it‘s commendable, but that is up to everyone themself. You can put on the table whatever you want, and less netlisting will probably end in more fun for more people. But that‘s independent from what I think is a fact:

that you also are handicapping yourself.

And that‘s ok.

I don't mean to sound like a jerk, but this game has a lot more to do with you flying good than with your list being good.

Nymranda is considered a problem because the learning curve is a little gentler, because of Nym's perfect knowledge of the game state on dial reveal. Similarly, torpscouts were a problem because it was easier for newbies to learn, because you just pointed the scouts at stuff, focused, and fired torpedoes. Even Palpatine and Phantoms were more of a problem because they made it easier to fly - the nerfs to those don't remove abilities from the ship, they remove obviousness and game-state knowledge from the player. (BTW, random tangent, given their position in Listjuggler, nothing bad would happen if the Phantom nerf was removed...)

Anyway, granted a lot of my evidence is circumstantial, but just to use one example, against a person who was not a newbie and actually seemed to know what he was doing with this game, I once absolutely destroyed this list:

•Countess Ryad (37) - TIE Defender
Expertise (4), TIE/x7 (-2), Twin Ion Engine Mk. II (1)

•Colonel Vessery (37) - TIE Defender
Expertise (4), TIE/x7 (-2)

•"Omega Leader" (26) - TIE/FO Fighter
Juke (2), Comm Relay (3)

with this list:

Rookie Pilot (25) x4 - X-Wing
Proton Torpedoes (4), Guidance Chips (0)

So what I'm getting at is that for casual play, if you know how to fly, just fly whatever the heck you want. Seriously.

In tournaments, you're surrounded by other really good players with really good lists. But you don't need to take the very best list to do well and have fun, if you really know how to use it. It really helps if you have pilots that are somewhere in the top 50 pilots in terms of how good they are. And you still want to pick good upgrades, for example, VI, PTL, Harpoons, Autothrusters, etc.

Personally, I feel like it takes the pressure off of me to bring a "bad" list, because I still often end up winning more than I lose, and any games I win make people be like "WTF, how did you win with that?" And you don't get blamed if you lose. I never lost with triple torpscouts when I was flying that list just to test it out. But I'd feel pretty dumb if I did, and probably get laughed at if I lost to something too "bad".

In the end, the world's best players (which I'm absolutely not claiming I'm one of, by the way) can win with just about anything. Unless you actually just really like Nym and Miranda, you don't need to take that list. There's plenty of stuff that can win if you have the skills. Fly what you love. Eventually, you'll get good enough with it that you can win with it too.

41 minutes ago, FTS Gecko said:

Edit: @Jike said it better than I did; in mirror matches especially the advantage will go to the player with the greater experience running said lists.

In mirror matches, it just as often goes to the player that won the initiative die roll.

44 minutes ago, LagJanson said:

There's a difference between 'not flying meta' and 'handicapping' yourself. Creating a "GOOD" list that isn't meta is very hard, but can be done if you can read the meta correctly and make the right decisions. Creating a list that is handicapping you means it's a list you know is not up to the same level and flying it anyway. It means you have to make MORE correct decisions on the map and hope your opponent is not up to your skill level.

This.

I spent 6 months flying Porkins, Dutch, and Hobbie. All had torpedoes, and their synergy and my practice made them not quite as bad as they looked. But, replacing Porkins with Wedge, Dutch with Nym, and then Hobbie with Airen Cracken, made that list significantly better in every aspect. But practicing with a 'beta' strike team made flying an 'alpha' strike team much easier. Like practicing using a heavier sword, it makes the real competition easier.

But I had more fun flying Porkins and chums. And that's more important to me than winning one or two more games per tournament. Now I'm trying out a completely different style of flying (Imperials...) just because I'm having fun with them. Until/unless I fly them enough to become more skilled with them, I will probably not do as well as I would with Nym and co.

At the end of the day, my 'win' condition is whether I enjoyed my time. So far, there has only been one game where I became fed up (ARCs vs Soontir, Vader, & Inqy. Dull and boring, because my opponent took forever to set his dials and we only had 3 rounds of actual shooting.) and one where I was pretty much resigned to losing (Porkins et al vs Telgar. Very one-sided.) before we set up. All the rest, including vs Nymanda, over the last year and a half of playing have been fun.

Love. You can learn all the math in the 'Verse, but you take a boat in the air that you don't love, she'll shake you off just as sure as the turning of the worlds. Love keeps her in the air when she oughta fall down, tells you she's hurtin' 'fore she keens. Makes her a home.

IMO it's a trade-off. A meta list is most likely mathematically superior,but also well-known, expected and practiced against.

A non-meta list is likely less effective, but gives you the element of surprise.

Whether the trade-off is worth it, depends on the particularities of the player and the meta. In my case for example,meta is definitely the way to go. I'm not a good enough list-builder to make something comparable to top meta lists, and my local group largely is ignorant of the wider meta (with about 2 exceptions), so there's nothing to be gained from running something surprising.

I tend to purposely avoid metalists, for a combination of reasons.

1. I acquire ships slowly, and by definition, the meta generally uses new stuff.

2. I like using something different from everyone else.

3. I take pride when I beat a really good and established list.

4. I like crafting lists from scratch.

I don't mind if people use lists they didn't create, (well, I suppose I'm subconsciously a little disappointed sometimes) all the cards are there for people to use the way they see best. I do grumble at 'overpowered' combos a bit, usually when it's the kind of thing that you literally can't do anything about, such as the TS/genius thing.

1 hour ago, thespaceinvader said:

Have you tried fitting Kylo in with two even semi-decent /sfs? Assuming you mean Silencer Kylo that is. It is not pretty.

Over 3 FOs? Two zetas with fcs will easily perform more consistently and decently

1 hour ago, impspy said:

Totally gonna run Kylo with 3 TIE F/O's cause thematic play is how I have fun and they are good little ships.

List? Kylo is next on my list of ships to obsess over.

19 minutes ago, ficklegreendice said:

Over 3 FOs? Two zetas with fcs will easily perform more consistently and decently

List?