22 minutes ago, Truthiness said:

/looks at CR90

/looks at Neb-B

Uhhhhh...

I'm assuming you're joking =D

I obviously ment on the Imperial side...

The other day I was thinking how much better could it be if the card worked like a task force.

Non unique officer. Cost 2. Large Ship Only. When blah blah (to not avoid rules debate) you may exhaust this card and a copy of that card on a friendly ship to blah blah.

Let's help double large fleet without killing MSUs or make 1+4/5 an activation monster.

18 minutes ago, ovinomanc3r said:

blah blah (to not avoid rules debate)

You're going to have to define blah blah before I can provide any input.

1 minute ago, Undeadguy said:

You're going to have to define blah blah before I can provide any input.

Basically the same the card already do. But wondered about adding just that mechanic to force it on fleets with a least two big ships de facto.

6 minutes ago, ovinomanc3r said:

Basically the same the card already do. But wondered about adding just that mechanic to force it on fleets with a least two big ships de facto.

I think the opportunity cost is too high losing 2 officer slots for the same effect.

8 minutes ago, ovinomanc3r said:

Basically the same the card already do. But wondered about adding just that mechanic to force it on fleets with a least two big ships de facto.

I actually think this would kill MSU. You now have 2 ships but 4 activations. People are already running 2 large ships with SAd. Not sure how this is a step up.

On ‎02‎.‎02‎.‎2018 at 9:38 PM, Blail Blerg said:

Especially for 2nd player. I’m a little surprised they released this version of the card.

For a while MSU was the common thing. It looks like a single large might become de facto power for a while. Let’s see if this prediction comes to pass. @Baltanok, do you have any interest in tracking: 1 large ship only, 1 large with SAD or bail or pryce, and finally 2 larges? I expect 1 large with those upgrades to increase dramatically with a smaller increase in double larges. Also for activations to average 6 in the new meta.

Still waiting for more testing. Unknown at this time if the timing change to one large equates to or surpasses the quality of two smalls.

For Imperial this card is not so strong. They have way to many cards they want in the officer slot. Intel Officer, Damage Control Officer, Brunson, Grint, Goran, .. So many cards that are good.
The Rebels have it easier. They can place a lot of the stable officers on the transports for the better effect (Toryn).

Do i think SA will be a problem? Yes. But only because of the problem that you can go last first. The "One big Ship 6+ activation" lists could start to become more dominate with him.
But SA is good to bring back the big ships onto the field. And if FFG can fix or even remove the last/first i think the SA will be a great card to make the fleets more variable.

3 hours ago, Undeadguy said:

I actually think this would kill MSU. You now have 2 ships but 4 activations. People are already running 2 large ships with SAd. Not sure how this is a step up.

2 ships, 3 activations.

The idea is to avoid SAd in 1+4/5 fleets. The real winner IMO now.

3 hours ago, draco193 said:

I think the opportunity cost is too high losing 2 officer slots for the same effect.

I agree but is the only slot every big ship share.

1 hour ago, ovinomanc3r said:

2 ships, 3 activations.

The idea is to avoid SAd in 1+4/5 fleets. The real winner IMO now.

Oh I get it now.

My original question was: Is MSU going to be chased out by 2+4 or 1+5?

Also, I tend to use ^ for SAD activation. So, IsdSAD + 3 goz = IZZZ^ or 1+3^

8 minutes ago, Blail Blerg said:

My original question was: Is MSU going to be chased out by 2+4 or 1+5?

Also, I tend to use ^ for SAD activation. So, IsdSAD + 3 goz = IZZZ^ or 1+3^

Well, MSU (0 large, 2+ non-flotilla smalls, 5+ ships) does seem to be getting rarer. 17.4% in wave 6 down to 8.6% in wave 7. Still getting to top tables as expected.

For the limited SAd fleets that I have, 1+x^, 2+x^, and demo+1+x^ are all performing at or above expected.

Nope. This **** is starting to look like algebra. We’re gonna be writing out fleets like;

R[MC75^xCR90(B)]+3T/Y=B(X3+J)xB3H

Solve for Y on earth would we do this to ourselves.

6 minutes ago, Madaghmire said:

Nope. This **** is starting to look like algebra. We’re gonna be writing out fleets like;

R[MC75^xCR90(B)]+3T/Y=B(X3+J)xB3H

Solve for Y on earth would we do this to ourselves.

Because we majored in math like idiots?

15 minutes ago, Madaghmire said:

Nope. This **** is starting to look like algebra. We’re gonna be writing out fleets like;

R[MC75^xCR90(B)]+3T/Y=B(X3+J)xB3H

Solve for Y on earth would we do this to ourselves.

Just wait till we introduce common core!

I hope its at least a common awareness that a basic ability to do fractions is required to git gud at this game.

And count to 7 (activations, coughs)

I can see peoples points that SA could potentially push activation count even higher but the main balancing point has got to be how competitive that slot is when it comes to awesome officers.

If if I have a concern it’s with the BT avenger 5+1 builds like I used to win regionals not that long ago since bt Avenger doesn’t need say an Intel officer to boost its offence or a lando for defence like you would see on the Akbar Mc80.

Probably the best solution to the 5+1 meta is through running msu corvettes or something equivalent that spreads your own points around into lots of small effective hitters that can’t be alpha struck.

All in all I’m not sure how the 5+1 msu gozanti builds are much different to the good ol demo +raider triple tap of old? It’s a build concept that has been around for a fair while, just replace demo triple tap with bt avenger double tap. Same result.

In our local meta, the number of activations has gone from 5-6 up to 6-7.

All of this is on the Strategic Advisor card.

Is it a good or bad thing? I don't know. StratAd (and flotilla spam) is a must-include for any list that cares if it is out-activated.

15 hours ago, geek19 said:

Because we majored in math like idiots?

Speak for yourself. I majored in the eminently marketable field of political science, which employs ones of peoples every year.

1 hour ago, Madaghmire said:

Speak for yourself. I majored in the eminently marketable field of political science, which employs ones of peoples every year.

Yo, gainfully-employed English major chiming in.

I guess it's nice that I can spell words right in my emails...?

15 hours ago, Blail Blerg said:

I hope its at least a common awareness that a basic ability to do fractions is required to git gud at this game.

And count to 7 (activations, coughs)

I'm considered fairly decent at this game. I don't math. Ever.

48 minutes ago, Darth Lupine said:

I'm considered fairly decent at this game. I don't math. Ever.

Can you count to seven? If not I’m going to have to strip you if your decent git gudder badge. Exemptions can be filed with the ISB for counting handicaps.

Seven is childs play. I dont even have to take off my socks to get to seven.

Seven and Bail.

Then we can start having a talk about activations.

Or Pryce and 20+ bids.

19 hours ago, Madaghmire said:

Nope. This **** is starting to look like algebra. We’re gonna be writing out fleets like;

R[MC75^xCR90(B)]+3T/Y=B(X3+J)xB3H

Solve for Y on earth would we do this to ourselves.

My personal fleet notes read like the awful intersection of a five year old, an alcoholic, and a remedial math student

3+1* - Doom Pickle 2XHIE90

I’m waiting for the time I write:

3+2* - Dongship 2xMD20/20 w/ Mustache Ride

The sad part is that if that list said MC30/30 it would actually be something I wrote