19 hours ago, Ailowynn said:

Lol. I think I agreed with your original point, but when Palp Aces was dominant it was one of the most anti-fun archetypes in the game. It was very much oppressive. Remember, it was B-Wings and X-Wings trying to take these buggers down. Oh ****, my B-Wing rolled three hits! That’s cool! Oh Soontir rolled five blanks! He gonna die—oh wait, no, Palp evade Autothrusters, zero damage. It was every bit as oppressive as Fairship. Both are based around not playing the game; they plink, and then run away and win on points. It’s mind boggling to me that we’re at that is a fun, wholesome list.

true, although I'm flaberghasted anyone aimed for soontir at all, lol. even before defenders got buffed i'd run 3 defenders against palp aces, and that lambda dies hard, fast and **** every time. didnt always win the rest of the game but if triple defenders can beat a list, its not that bad. turrets, missles and splash bombs are stupid because you cant dodge... youre choices are irrelevant. arguably you arent even playing a game against alpha strike, your opponent is simply performing a missile attack and winning. guess that was my point

4 minutes ago, Vontoothskie said:

true, although I'm flaberghasted anyone aimed for soontir at all, lol. even before defenders got buffed i'd run 3 defenders against palp aces, and that lambda dies hard, fast and **** every time. didnt always win the rest of the game but if triple defenders can beat a list, its not that bad. turrets, missles and splash bombs are stupid because you cant dodge... youre choices are irrelevant. arguably you arent even playing a game against alpha strike, your opponent is simply performing a missile attack and winning. guess that was my point

With many lists you also aren't playing a game against Palp aces either, you're just moving ships, rolling dice and pretending it matters when the truth is it doesn't,because you can't really hurt your opponent unless he screws up.

2 hours ago, LordBlades said:

With many lists you also aren't playing a game against Palp aces either, you're just moving ships, rolling dice and pretending it matters when the truth is it doesn't,because you can't really hurt your opponent unless he screws up.

certainly. there are bad matchups.

but I dont think imp aces were as mean spirited and purposefully NPE as some of todays crap.

alpha striking is basically saying "im using my opponent to masturbate my ego by winning. they wont get to play and i dont respect them or their desire to enjoy the game." your goal is to win before your opponent even activates in the combat phase. thats some ugly bs

1 hour ago, Vontoothskie said:

But I dont think imp aces were as mean spirited and purposefully NPE as some of todays crap.

Imp/Palp Aces could be beaten by a number of strategies, like blocking, control (stress, ion), killing the shuttle quickly with focus fire, etc. it’s not a cake walk but it’s doable.

1 hour ago, Vontoothskie said:

alpha striking is basically saying "im using my opponent to masturbate my ego by winning. they wont get to play and i dont respect them or their desire to enjoy the game." your goal is to win before your opponent even activates in the combat phase. thats some ugly bs

Uhhh. Alpha strikes are legit strategies, the ultimate expression of jousting, one of the fundamental strategies from wave one!

And I thought winning was the objective??? Having fun playing is not something that must be sacrificed either. But I guess it’s actually otherwise.

6 hours ago, Vontoothskie said:

certainly. there are bad matchups.

but I dont think imp aces were as mean spirited and purposefully NPE as some of todays crap.

alpha striking is basically saying "im using my opponent to masturbate my ego by winning. they wont get to play and i dont respect them or their desire to enjoy the game." your goal is to win before your opponent even activates in the combat phase. thats some ugly bs

I've played against plenty of alpha strike lists. I have not ever been required to masturbate my opponent.

...Or their ego.

...it was voluntary.

7 hours ago, GrimmyV said:

Imp/ Palp Aces could be beaten by a number of strategies, like blocking, control (stress, ion), killing the shuttle quickly with focus fire, etc. it’s not a cake walk but it’s doable.

Uhhh. Alpha strikes are legit strategies, the ultimate expression of jousting, one of the fundamental strategies from wave one!

And I thought winning was the objective??? Having fun playing is not something that must be sacrificed either. But I guess it’s actually otherwise.

I see where he's coming from Remember, in the time of Palp Aces, only Palp aces had ways of mitigating damage (and the definitively inferior Imp Aces). Every other build just took damage over time and hoped to win the race. Now, with equally skilled players, there's a big problem, because the non-Palp player is fighting an uphill battle where not only do they have to kill an ace - they've got to do it before they lose a ship or it's game over (excluding TIE swarms). This means the Palp player can afford to slow play and wait for the single kill that assures them victory. It was a brutal time for swarms/jousting lists, which was more or less the entirety of the meta at that point.

Alpha are a legitimate strategy, sure. However, they have exactly two natural counters in the game - Black One and Countermeasures. Black One is fairly common via association with the reliably excellent Poe, and countermeasures takes the place of EU on large base ships that don't need repositioning, like Asajj. However, this leaves a massive field of pilots, ships, lists and list archetypes in the lurch:

To beat the alpha using conventional means, you need higher PS than the ordinance carriers. Thankfully, Nus are only PS 2, but there are other contenders around like the still excellent NyManda, QD, Rhos and the like. So unless you're flying excessively high PS (PS 9 or higher) you're probably losing a ship before you shoot, or taking enormous damage to an expensive ship.

To actually joust an Alpha, you need very high hull, high damage ships that shoot first or enormous damage mitigation. In other words, you need a higher PS alpha list or some kind of amazing gimmick to get your licks in. Examples include bare bones Ghosts (massive hull low cost), Rey/Finn (reliable 2 evades on each defense roll), Kanan/Fenn (fortressing with its own problems) and so on.

The alpha typically has an enormous... alpha turn... in which their damage is impressive, but dramatically decreases either forever or for a few turns (depending on the reload action). Lists need to be able to win the overall damage race, which often means somehow being in a winning position even if a ship is nuked. Imp aces are the obvious example, as Soontir Fel is all but invulnerable to low-PS missile carriers, but of course you're building for failure by taking such a low hull ship that only has focus tokens for mods. The alpha limits you to lists with large point fortresses that either can't be killed in a turn (Asajj, Dash, Miranda etc) in order to give you a chance later on in the game.

Lastly, Alphas warp the meta. If swarms weren't dead for numerous reasons, Harpoon Nus would do it all by themselves. Actual jousting lists like Thug Life, 4BZ, 4 Kihraxzes and so on have been entirely shoved out due to a ridiculously difficult battle against harpoon lists, which force them to fly apart. Even turrets have taken a big hit - RAC has to run from 3 harpoons, Han can't stand the spike damage and Dash just isn't the arc-dodger he used to be with LW instead of PTL+ EU.

So yes, Alpha Strikes are a "viable strategy", but due to poor design choices* flying a strong Alpha list says to your opponent "I'm forcing you to play X,Y,X because I auto-wing against A,B,C. Deal with it and give me my win, or fly something you dislike and have a 50/50 chance of beating my meta list". It's a toxic decision to make, even if made by an innocent play who genuinely likes flying Alpha lists.

*Or potentially an incomplete design that is yet to be addressed by the developers in future releases.

You mean I’ve waited all these waves to see ordnance become significant only be the ‘*******’ if I run an ordnance list?

Well ***.

7 minutes ago, GrimmyV said:

You mean I’ve waited all these waves to see ordnance become significant only be the ‘*******’ if I run an ordnance list?

Well ***.

Hold your Tauntauns. I define an "Alpha List" as one designed entirely around the opening salvo, like Triple JM5Ks, 3Nu + QD and so on. Having an aplha element in a list really isn't the same at all.

Like if you're running QD with a TIE swarm and have 4 points left over, go for the harpoon, sure. If you're running TIE bombers, do what you like because they're bombers. If you're running a Gunboat ace, splurge on those harpoons or APTs.

But if you're actively building a list to win on the first turn, stop and think about what will happen. If you're playing against a list that's unprepared for a huge alpha, you're going to win without trying. Unless (and I doubt it) you get enjoyment purely out of winning rather than actually playing the game this is undesirable. If you're facing another alpha list, the win will be decided primarily by initiative and the relative PSs of your ships, so again there's not much of a game. Finally, if you're flying against a list that's fully prepared for an Alpha (like Poe and countermeasures Dash) the there's also no game whatsoever, since your whole list is based on a trick that no longer works.

There's no situation where an Alpha Strike based list results in a truly enjoyable game for both players, unless both players mutually agreed before the game that it'd be a thing, which is impossible in most tournaments.

On the other hand,, individual bits or ordinance in a list pose no problem. Extra oomph is always great, and you get what you pay for on "normal" ships.

1 hour ago, GrimmyV said:

You mean I’ve waited all these waves to see ordnance become significant only be the ‘*******’ if I run an ordnance list?

Well ***.

Basically, yes. Ordnance was badly designed in Wave 1 and the game would be better without it.

On 2/23/2018 at 11:16 AM, Boom Owl said:

Its really consistent what leads to balance issues in X-Wing:

• Lots of HP or Defense
• Lots of Upgrade Options
• Turret

If a ship has only 2 of those things its balanced and completely fine.

If it has all 3 of those things it leads to serious issues with the game every single time.

Once one ship can do EVERYTHING X-Wing stops being fun immediately. Always.

This is simplistic, but it has extreme merit and so many applications. As an Architect by trade, I’ve always comically —but at the same time seriously— used the three-legged stool analogy with new clients, which dovetails perfectly with your if X “ has only 2 of those things its balanced and completely fine” theory. A three-legged stool cannot stand with only two legs without help. I regularly tell clients this, “in the three components of the project, you choose two, I must control the other one for this to work. The three legs in the construction of your project are: good, fast and cheap. So choose two and we’ll move along nicely.” It is a basic tenant in a complex situation, but at its heart it summarizes the issue and basic tenants of a successful project.

I do think there is merit for the designers to look at ships and builds in a design or errata process and insure only two exist for each ship, this could be of great assistance. Does the dial, price, broken mods or pilot skill factor in? Sure, but it’s arguable not more than these three; well done @Boom Owl , props.

Maybe someone is listening?????

1 hour ago, Astech said:

On the other hand,, individual bits or ordinance in a list pose no problem. Extra oomph is always great, and you get what you pay for on "normal" ships.

18 minutes ago, Stay On The Leader said:

Basically, yes. Ordnance was badly designed in Wave 1 and the game would be better without it.

So a little ordnance is ok but a whole bunch is bad. Like TLT, or maybe not as bad as that. I suppose that type of pattern does point to ‘poor design’ but I think the original intent was to have a powerful one shot attack with mods (pro torps/con miss) that was somewhat difficult to pull off d/t the TL, or a special attack that goes off twice (clusters) because it’s fun. They weren’t meant to have full mods or be the first shot, being more of an opportunity to finish off a ship during a dogfight. If you could pull off an alpha strike in those days it was something special. And of course no one really took Torps and Missiles because adding more generic ships was far more efficient when the only defense was focus green dice.

4 hours ago, Astech said:

Hold your Tauntauns. I define an "Alpha List" as one designed entirely around the opening salvo, like Triple JM5Ks, 3Nu + QD and so on. Having an aplha element in a list really isn't the same at all.

Like if you're running QD with a TIE swarm and have 4 points left over, go for the harpoon, sure. If you're running TIE bombers, do what you like because they're bombers. If you're running a Gunboat ace, splurge on those harpoons or APTs.

But if you're actively building a list to win on the first turn, stop and think about what will happen. If you're playing against a list that's unprepared for a huge alpha, you're going to win without trying. Unless (and I doubt it) you get enjoyment purely out of winning rather than actually playing the game this is undesirable. If you're facing another alpha list, the win will be decided primarily by initiative and the relative PSs of your ships, so again there's not much of a game. Finally, if you're flying against a list that's fully prepared for an Alpha (like Poe and countermeasures Dash) the there's also no game whatsoever, since your whole list is based on a trick that no longer works.

There's no situation where an Alpha Strike based list results in a truly enjoyable game for both players, unless both players mutually agreed before the game that it'd be a thing, which is impossible in most tournaments.

On the other hand,, individual bits or ordinance in a list pose no problem. Extra oomph is always great, and you get what you pay for on "normal" ships.

This. It's why I only ran my PS10 rebel alpha strike team once in any tournament. It was only fun if I didn't succeed at removing an enemy ship or two in the opening joust.

I still use Porkins and chums because they're a beta strike team and can only use their torps in subsequent turns.

4 hours ago, Stay On The Leader said:

Basically, yes. Ordnance was badly designed in Wave 1 and the game would be better without it.

Maybe, but utilizing @Boom Owl ‘s three legged stool, if the carrier of ordinance was arc-locked (no turret) like the TIE Bomber, Punisher, then it’s OK for the game?

7 minutes ago, clanofwolves said:

Maybe, but utilizing @Boom Owl ‘s three legged stool, if the carrier of ordinance was arc-locked (no turret) like the TIE Bomber, Punisher, then it’s OK for the game?

Well...I think alot of the comments about Alpha strikes are more about what it feels like to lose a ship very early in a game. I can't really tell anyone to enjoy what that feels like.

Nym and Miranda have been a balance problem because staying out of arc is not a legitimate counter play option. Choose between taking a bomb, a turret, or the alpha. Thats pretty much was always going to be a problem until one of their upgrade bar options becomes mutually exclusive. Though Nym's lack of regen makes him kinda fair now maybe? The ghost is the same thing...its primary is close to an infinite missile. Dodge that and your taking a 4x TLT wrench to the face. Dodge the TLT and your taking a 5 dice primary.

Other Alpha's are comparatively much less of a problem. Vader, Quickdraw, Wedge, Craken, Talonbane, Torani, Gunboats, Firesprays, etc....these are all ships that are specifically balanced around their ability to carry ordinance. And all of them besides maybe Quickdraw are basically competitively terrible choices. Even Quickdraw is a bit of a trap without Palp to protect her shields.

An lets face it...gunboats are jank. There bad. Potentially really bad. The PS2 Nu is a joke and not much better than a properly played Tie Striker. The Rho variants are just as bad to.

Countermeasures and Blackone are in no way the best or even first choice counter against these things.

Ship count, big base engine upgrade, and turning off the joust auto pilot in your brain during the first three rounds is a lot more reliable.

1 hour ago, clanofwolves said:

Maybe, but utilizing @Boom Owl ‘s three legged stool, if the carrier of ordinance was arc-locked (no turret) like the TIE Bomber, Punisher, then it’s OK for the game?

No, because game design can't be boiled down to simplistic furniture analogies.

If game design was in a place where Four TIE Bombers swept in and removed 2/3rds of your squad before you got to fire then it's not ok for the game. Doesn't matter if they're arc-locked or not, it's the outcome that counts not the specifics of the recipe.

1 hour ago, Boom Owl said:

An lets face it...gunboats are jank. There bad. Potentially really bad. The PS2 Nu is a joke and not much better than a properly played Tie Striker. The Rho variants are just as bad to.

Yeah, what?

Gunboats are everywhere right now. Simple fanboi-ism is not the explanation for it. Gunboats can be counter-played but they are efficient missile platforms.

2 hours ago, Stay On The Leader said:

No, because game design can't be boiled down to simplistic furniture analogies.

If game design was in a place where Four TIE Bombers swept in and removed 2/3rds of your squad before you got to fire then it's not ok for the game. Doesn't matter if they're arc-locked or not, it's the outcome that counts not the specifics of the recipe.

You may have an arguable point, but meta analysis and recording to date wouldn’t support your hypothesis.

1 hour ago, Sekac said:

Yeah, what?

Gunboats are everywhere right now. Simple fanboi-ism is not the explanation for it. Gunboats can be counter-played but they are efficient missile platforms.

I stand by my statement. PS2 Gunboats arent very good compared to other options across the factions, particularly a solitary Harpoon/LRS Nu. There fun no doubt and get better in a mini swarm. They are efficient missile platforms but that doesnt mean they are actually good.

I will admit I have a overly broad definition of whats bad or jank.

Basically for me if its not Miranda, Assaj, a Ghost, or possibly Wookies ( though I am warming up to these) your consciously deciding to play the competitive game at a disadvantage. Its ok to choose anything...I dont care what people use and all of it takes some skill to win with. Its just that some archetypes inherently have a better balanced mix of defense, offense, and control. Gunboats only have one of those things.

Thats why I put stuff like 3BQD in roughly the same category as the Z-95 Missile swarm. Its solid offensively if your opponent allows it to be and interesting but ultimately kinda janky. Miranda, Assaj, and the Ghost dont really care what lines up against them, 3BQD might make then a tiny bit more nervous but all that means is their not facing an auto-win and are actually potentially playing a game. Similar to how RAC/Lo against Paratanni or more than 2 ships is a game instead of an auto win.

The lists that have 2 gunboats in them like Kylo/Rho/Rho are fun but not anywhere near the quality of more consistent options.

After that you have lists with one Nu or Rho which almost universally would be better against the field with a Palp Lamda.

So yea I dont really think its that far off to claim that gunboats are janky. They are solid sure, but competitively they are a sub optimal choice that a player makes based on some other variable, usually faction loyalty, nostalgia or a preference for arc gameplay.

In this meta and basically any prior meta from the past many months if someone is running a ship with only a forward facing arc for offense and no defensive combo to remove variance they are putting themselves at a disadvantage competitively. Thats why gunboats to me qualify as jank. That means I consider a huge # of lists to basically be jank, including Vader/Quickdraw+, Poe, Rey kinda, and Arc-170s.

Im trying really hard and probably failing to not to be a argumentaive troll hear. Hope this isnt coming off that way or to overtly contrarian .

Its maybe a little extreme to call the gunboat "bad" but I cant be the only one that looks across the table at multple PS2 Gunboats with Harpoons/LRS and sighs with relief that there wont be a mountain of hp, variance free defense, regen, turrets, or bombs to deal with.

I have only a handful of problems to solve in games against gunboats. Get into range 1, stay out of range entirely, or avoid a couple arcs. That sounds pretty janky to me.

40 minutes ago, Boom Owl said:

Basically for me if its not Miranda, Assaj, a Ghost, or possibly Wookies ( though I am warming up to these) your consciously deciding to play the competitive game at a disadvantage.

Okay, fair. Kind of a "if you're not first, you're last" approach to competitive ships.

I don't see the game that way, but I've also honed the art of perpetually going 4-2 and missing the cut at competitive events so take my opinion with a few tokens of salt.

I think the success of 3BQD suggests that a more nuanced understanding of the game is required. Extreme offense mitigates the need for defense. This is the underlying design philosophy of alpha strikers. My defensive limitations are irrelevant if the threat is harpooned into oblivion. It also prevents a form of control in that a player must position well or be eradicated quickly. Not control in the form of stress or ion. But "move well or die" is a form of control too.

Double crack hlc gunboat Vader just took top 8 in Sea Regional and had the top mov and undefeated score in Swiss. Not sure they entirely suck but with the current low floor high ceiling lists out there they are definitely not S tier.

1 hour ago, Boom Owl said:

Basically for me if its not Miranda, Assaj, a Ghost, or possibly Wookies ( though I am warming up to these) your consciously deciding to play the competitive game at a disadvantage.

1 hour ago, Boom Owl said:

Thats why GUNBOATS to me qualify as jank. That means I consider a huge # of lists to basically be jank, including Vader/Quickdraw+, Poe, Rey kinda, and Arc-170s.

At least say HER name right if you are to blasphem.

1% of ships/pilots = near auto win

99% of ships/pilots = jank

Ok, gotcha. It’s still the same then, the dividing line between tier one and two is very thin with a shallow top and very very deep bottom. This game never changes.

On 2/24/2018 at 4:26 PM, MajorJuggler said:

Of your three categories, none of them are actually mutually exclusive! As both a player and a designer I cleanly fit all three descriptions.

So what's the 3xNuQD list that's doing the rounds? I always seem to be 1 point over. Are the Gunboats not running the ordnance title?

8 minutes ago, GrimmyV said:

At least say HER name right if you are to blasphem.

1% of ships/pilots = near auto win

99% of ships/pilots = jank

Ok, gotcha. It’s still the same then, the dividing line between tier one and two is very thin with a shallow top and very very deep bottom. This game never changes.

If a list can be beaten simply by choosing both the speed and direction of dials properly its probably closer to jank than it is to the S-Tier.

Maybe thats what I should have said from the start instead of calling Gunboats bad.

Rho/Rho/Vader fits that same description.

Its bad because I could beat it just by not being bad at X-Wing.

Should separately mention that if your goal is to win a tournament, not just make Top 8-16 the definition of what is good changes drastically.

1 hour ago, jimmius said:

So what's the 3xNuQD list that's doing the rounds? I always seem to be 1 point over. Are the Gunboats not running the ordnance title?

Correct. Just harpoons and lrs on the gunboats.