6 hours ago, SabineKey said:

So, if someone else enjoys the game in a way different then you, they're a WAAC?

Wow, for someone who tries to get more respect for how you play the game, your lack of respect for others is quite hypocritical.

No. You are dialing it up to 11.

Quote

Less trends is more diversity. More diversity is less perfect lists. Less perfect lists is less broken combo exploitation.

This is what most people complain about. Lack of diversity and broken combos.

If it bothers you one that this might happen thanks to the lack of data, then winning is probably more important to you one than playing and/or the health of the game.

Edit: In reviewing my posts, I have realized that the above statement was better served by the use of the pronoun "one" not "you," since that was my actual meaning. I guess there still is use for said word in the non-personal world of internet conversations. Sorry, @SabineKey.

3 minutes ago, Darth Meanie said:

No. You are dialing it up to 11.

This is what most people complain about. Lack of diversity and broken combos.

If it bothers you that this might happen thanks to the lack of data, then winning is probably more important to you than playing and/or the health of the game.

Out of deference to @sozin, I will leave this be. I will simply end by saying that one doesn't have to be only concerned with winning to think that having the ability to analyze data is a good and fun thing.

5 minutes ago, SabineKey said:

Out of deference to @sozin, I will leave this be. I will simply end by saying that one doesn't have to be only concerned with winning to think that having the ability to analyze data is a good and fun thing.

Sure. But I am talking about how that impacts the game state.

1. Sozin has been collecting the data.
2. People look at it to see what it shows.
3. People want to do well at a tournament.
4. People are all looking at the same data.
5. People all come to nearly the same conclusion about what will do well.
6. People all show up at a tournament with the same few ideas.
7. People complain the meta game is stale/broken/limited to a few combos.

The Fun at step 2 can lead directly to the Not Fun at step 6.

3 minutes ago, Darth Meanie said:

Sure. But I am talking about how that impacts the game state.

1. Sozin has been collecting the data.
2. People look at it to see what it shows.
3. People want to do well at a tournament.
4. People are all looking at the same data.
5. People all come to nearly the same conclusion about what will do well.
6. People all show up at a tournament with the same few ideas.
7. People complain the meta game is stale/broken/limited to a few combos.

The Fun at step 2 can lead directly to the Not Fun at step 6.

If you would like an actual response to this, please either pm me or make a new thread.

This is the internet age, top lists are still going to rise to the top without meta-wing, just like they did before meta-wing was around. This just means that information will be harder to get and there will be a greater information gap between the hardcore players and the less invested ones on what the current trends are.

It could also lead to more meta stagnation, as only the very best lists will be known to people and it will be much harder for players to see which lists are just on the cusp and poised for a breakthrough. The meta will also feel less diverse because we will only hear about the lists that completely dominate and the more interesting lists that occassionally top will get lost in the noise.

The shuttering of list juggler doesn’t mean information about the meta on the internet is going to completely stop, it just means we lose that level of granularity.

19 minutes ago, Tvboy said:

This is the internet age, top lists are still going to rise to the top without meta-wing, just like they did before meta-wing was around. This just means that information will be harder to get and there will be a greater information gap between the hardcore players and the less invested ones on what the current trends are.

It could also lead to more meta stagnation, as only the very best lists will be known to people and it will be much harder for players to see which lists are just on the cusp and poised for a breakthrough. The meta will also feel less diverse because we will only hear about the lists that completely dominate and the more interesting lists that occassionally top will get lost in the noise.

 The shuttering of list juggler doesn’t mean information about the meta on the internet is going to completely stop, it just means we lose that level of granularity.

Well put, it high lights the points I am concerned with. Mainly this gap that I think will form between good casual players and teams of players that can pool and share their resources/data.

I am very concerned about what this means for FFG's intentions though. Only time will tell, and I no longer have a good feeling about it.

51 minutes ago, Darth Meanie said:

The problem and the impact is that FFG spends all it's time fussing around with that tiny little bit of the game.

Meanwhile, Epic, Campaign, Narrative, and Objective-based play see no official attention at all.

I think (hope?) that these two don't impact on each other. While I've been going on a lot about high-tier competitive play here, I really enjoy Epic and missions, and the couple of objective based events we've had at my FLGS. ?

From what seems to be shaping up with 2nd edition, FFG are giving themselves the tools to make quick but quite granular and focused changes to that competitive meta when needed, which should hopefully have a positive effect on having a varied metagame. And they've clearly got plans to bring Epic back for 2nd edition - hopefully sooner rather than later, although I'm aware they've got a deluge of new products to get out with the launch of the new edition.

A Corellian Conflict style box for X-Wing would be an absolute dream for me!

59 minutes ago, sozin said:

Friends, may I please ask, not to devolve this thread into a ****-show? Darth's got some valid points, and I agree with the counterpoints too, would love to keep things constructive. I'm off to work for the day, good luck :-)

The hero we need...

1 hour ago, Darth Meanie said:

Well, you can still do that. You're just going to have to do it on your own.

Not really, you can just watch what does well in a couple of major tournaments (this will still be widely discussed most likely).

Case in point myself. I come from a really small community, where the average tournament is 6 to 8 guys and there's only 3 of us interested in being competitive. As such, for large events we net list, because the 3 of us won't come with the next power list. It's just not enough brain power to bounce around ideas and break them down.

However, I don't really use ListJuggler for net listing. I mainly take my competitive lists from either major tournament results or 'X is OP' threads. I mainly used ListJuggler for in-depth analysis, like how a given list is performing in certain match-up, is variant A doing better than variant B of a list, etc or theorycrafting. I used to run my list ideas into ListJuggler to see if anyone was running that thing and how they did with it.

If anything, the lack of a reliable data source would make me experiment less and stick with stuff proven to work, as I d have way less tools to (in)validate any list I'd make. Of course, that's just me, so purely anecdotal

25 minutes ago, Jarval said:

I think (hope?) that these two don't impact on each other. While I've been going on a lot about high-tier competitive play here, I really enjoy Epic and missions, and the couple of objective based events we've had at my FLGS. ?

From what seems to be shaping up with 2nd edition, FFG are giving themselves the tools to make quick but quite granular and focused changes to that competitive meta when needed, which should hopefully have a positive effect on having a varied metagame. And they've clearly got plans to bring Epic back for 2nd edition - hopefully sooner rather than later, although I'm aware they've got a deluge of new products to get out with the launch of the new edition.

Resources are finite. If they are mostly dealing with tournament play, then they are not able/willing to do much else. This is probably evidenced by: (A.) less than 1 Epic release per year in 1.0 and (B.) the fact that in ALL the announcements for the development of 2.0 we have gotten so far, there is no whiff of any Epic ideas at all.

There is enthusiasm for Epic, but it is often eclipsed by tournament meta talk and dealing with balance issues in that small milieu.

Nobody cares about Epic.

4 minutes ago, SOTL said:

Nobody cares about Epic.

Are you baiting me, or do you really think that?

1 minute ago, Darth Meanie said:

Are you baiting me, or do you really think that?

It is true, and you won't be able to resist rising to it.

45 minutes ago, Sk3tch said:

Well put, it high lights the points I am concerned with. Mainly this gap that I think will form between good casual players and teams of players that can pool and share their resources/data.

I am very concerned about what this means for FFG's intentions though. Only time will tell, and I no longer have a good feeling about it.

It‘s no secret that teams collected their own data on top tier squads and which matchups are good/bad.

As such, free and open data was more leveling the playing field to those in the know. It allowed people like @LordBlades or me to get a good idea about larger metas and allowed us to play. Note @Darth Meanie that this does not turn us into WAACs. But I do not have enough time and disposable income to fly to a system open to get 0-2 twice and be immediately out. I want the chance to playe some fun games, and completely onesided games are not something I consider to be fun - unless it‘s at home at the kitchen table.

I'm sad to see listjuggler go. I often went to the site to print out a visualization of my squad lists. And to check the meta not just to see what's performing well, but to mine ideas for my own lists.

It's going to be a smaller community in 2.0.

1 hour ago, GreenDragoon said:

It‘s no secret that teams collected their own data on top tier squads and which matchups are good/bad.

As such, free and open data was more leveling the playing field to those in the know. It allowed people like @LordBlades or me to get a good idea about larger metas and allowed us to play. Note @Darth Meanie that this does not turn us into WAACs. But I do not have enough time and disposable income to fly to a system open to get 0-2 twice and be immediately out. I want the chance to playe some fun games, and completely onesided games are not something I consider to be fun - unless it‘s at home at the kitchen table.

Well, my point was not to have my point obscured by a 4-letter acronym, but I guess I've just put my foot in it.

And from personal experience, one-sided games are also not fun at the dining room table either.

2 hours ago, SOTL said:

Nobody cares about Epic.

Then

2 hours ago, SOTL said:

It is true, and you won't be able to resist rising to it.

that's

1 hour ago, Koing907 said:

It's going to be a smaller community in 2.0.

true.

Yeah it is true. Unavoidable really.

17 hours ago, Hawkstrike said:

Returning to a bogus time before ListJuggler existed ...

Yeah whatever happened to that podcast? I am actually surprised S&V is still alive.

It is still kicking! I haven't been on it in a while (real life keeps getting in the way), but their recent episodes have been pretty awesome.

https://scumvillainy.podbean.com/

2 hours ago, Darth Meanie said:

Well, my point was not to have my point obscured by a 4-letter acronym, but I guess I've just put my foot in it.

Might be a good idea to not use labels to create strawman and paint broad strokes on people you don't agree with.

You filthy casual.

12 hours ago, SOTL said:

information flows less freely and I'm not too sad

Seems like SOTL works for the FCC.

Seriously though, not having the data on what is very popular (i.e. OP/broken) should lead to more diversity of lists - at least in the short term right after points adjustments. But it may just lead to a very small group of people staying ahead of the curve.

9 minutes ago, Skitchx said:

Seems like SOTL works for the FCC.

Seriously though, not having the data on what is very popular (i.e. OP/broken) should lead to more diversity of lists - at least in the short term right after points adjustments. But it may just lead to a very small group of people staying ahead of the curve.

We're still going to have the data on the OP/broken lists though, people are going to post the lists that top at high profile tournaments through sites like these and Reddit and Facebook and podcasts. What we're not going to have is the interesting borderline lists that are almost there but need just a few more players to pick them up to break through. Those lists are going to fall through the cracks, and players are just going to play either the obviously dominating lists that immediately rise to the top or their own janky rogue lists that crash and burn under the weight of the established meta titans.

Restricting data flow without being able to completely cut it off doesn't improve innovation, it stifles it.

31 minutes ago, Tvboy said:

Restricting data flow without being able to completely cut it off doesn't improve innovation, it stifles it.

My gut says that you are right on that -- I predict that the lists that win tournaments as report in Reddit/FFG forums/FB are going to be the ones that everyone brings. But the smart list builders/strong players are going to see the issues with those lists and bring some creative counters. So maybe its both? On the whole, it'll probably stifle innovation, but for a small set of samples, maybe it'll promote it? Geez, I don't know, its complicated!

Hey man, are we going to play Rising Sun at the game store tonight? I'm ready to bring my copy :-)

25 minutes ago, sozin said:

My gut says that you are right on that -- I predict that the lists that win tournaments as report in Reddit/FFG forums/FB are going to be the ones that everyone brings. But the smart list builders/strong players are going to see the issues with those lists and bring some creative counters. So maybe its both? On the whole, it'll probably stifle innovation, but for a small set of samples, maybe it'll promote it? Geez, I don't know, its complicated!

Hey man, are we going to play Rising Sun at the game store tonight? I'm ready to bring my copy :-)

I think meta-wing allowed people to see what the successful lists that were just below the dominating lists, the underdog lists that had a fighting chance but were underperforming, and then those people could sort of focus the power of the aggregate on those lists and playtest and tweak them together as a hivemind to bring them up to the level of the stuff that was obviously powerful.

An example that comes to my mind was the Quick Draw + Analysts lists that started doing well in Opens. IIRC, a few players noticed this list quietly doing well in smaller tournaments and started talking about it on the forums and sharing strategies and eventually it became a niche player in the meta. Stuff like that is going to be harder without the results reporting from Juggler and meta-wing.

PM'd you about Rising Sun.

Unless I'm missing something yuge, aren't we going to have meta data from lists at all OP events? IIRC, one of the big points of the app is that you could sync your list into an OP tournament, rather than deal with all that messy Kraytable paperwork? I'm guessing this is where they're going to get all their data mining for points values and list occurrence from.

And yeah, I ended a sentence in a preposition. #giveadamnisbroke