Thoughts I'd offer for you friend (apologies if you've already offered them)

6 hours ago, MasterShake2 said:

My opponent's take away from these 3 games is that a low initiative Y-Wing will never fire it's torpedoes...so I point out to him the pair of Initiative 2 Y-Wings that destroyed the Initiative 5 Fett all 3 games.

You're correct: low initiative with target lock weapons is an issue, not because it'll never fire but because it's hard to get a lock and fire in the same turn . That's not quite the same thing. The problem is if your ship is getting taken out between locking and firing, which is more an issue of making sure something else is 'the big threat' that turn.

At the same time, if you're not used to playing tunes with positioning and manoeuvre, arming a Y-wing with an ion cannon turret lets it contribute with less effort - and with both Fenn and Fett really liking predictable opponents (predictable opponents are easy to get within range 1 of), it may suit you more.

6 hours ago, MasterShake2 said:

spend some time trying to explain my full thought process both with his flying and the various errors that I repeatedly jumped on, but it's substantially harder to do than I thought it might be. How do I explain this without just resorting to "I can predict your maneuvers, but you're not even trying to predict mine"?

Rather than explaining the flaws in his piloting, go a bit Morpheus. "How did I beat you?"

It's not a smug question, asked politely. Ask:

• Why did you set up where you did?
• What did you want to happen?
  • Since he may not have had a plan, the next question is "with hindsight what would you have liked to happen?"

Jumping straight to predicting moves is sometimes the wrong way to think; some people find it difficult and that goes double if they're not used to ships or options.

I always work this way:

• Look at my squad, and look at yours.
  • Is yours or mine better in a simple head-on pass? (with more ships and torpedoes, 'mine' is)
    • Needs to turn into a spread-out, swirly fight at medium-to-close range. Don't set up opposite me.
  • Is there a ship which absolutely cannot be allowed to reach a one-on-one fight at the end of the match? (probably luke)
    • If you have a choice of targets, try to take Luke out whilst you've got the combined force of your entire squad.
  • Are rocks and obstacles more of an issue for you or me (probably me, I have more ships including two can't-turn-for-toffee Ys, whilst both your important ships have decent dials and white boost).
    • Try to make the rocks as close-packed as possible and fight in and around them

If you can start getting this level of assessment in, the rest - having a turn 1-2 manoeuvre plan before the game starts, for example - will come with time. Just begin with "what does a good and bad engagement for your squad look like?" in broad handfuls.

Most important recommendation: don't keep changing - keep the same squad and maybe the same setup, and try to figure out what went wrong in game #1, and try something different from the same startpoint . Because comparing on a level playing field is a bit part of figuring out whether option (a) is better than (b).

6 hours ago, Magnus Grendel said:

Thoughts I'd offer for you friend (apologies if you've already offered them)

You're correct: low initiative with target lock weapons is an issue, not because it'll never fire but because it's hard to get a lock and fire in the same turn . That's not quite the same thing. The problem is if your ship is getting taken out between locking and firing, which is more an issue of making sure something else is 'the big threat' that turn.

At the same time, if you're not used to playing tunes with positioning and manoeuvre, arming a Y-wing with an ion cannon turret lets it contribute with less effort - and with both Fenn and Fett really liking predictable opponents (predictable opponents are easy to get within range 1 of), it may suit you more.

Rather than explaining the flaws in his piloting, go a bit Morpheus. "How did I beat you?"

It's not a smug question, asked politely. Ask:

• Why did you set up where you did?
• What did you want to happen?
  • Since he may not have had a plan, the next question is "with hindsight what would you have liked to happen?"

Jumping straight to predicting moves is sometimes the wrong way to think; some people find it difficult and that goes double if they're not used to ships or options.

I always work this way:

• Look at my squad, and look at yours.
  • Is yours or mine better in a simple head-on pass? (with more ships and torpedoes, 'mine' is)
    • Needs to turn into a spread-out, swirly fight at medium-to-close range. Don't set up opposite me.
  • Is there a ship which absolutely cannot be allowed to reach a one-on-one fight at the end of the match? (probably luke)
    • If you have a choice of targets, try to take Luke out whilst you've got the combined force of your entire squad.
  • Are rocks and obstacles more of an issue for you or me (probably me, I have more ships including two can't-turn-for-toffee Ys, whilst both your important ships have decent dials and white boost).
    • Try to make the rocks as close-packed as possible and fight in and around them

If you can start getting this level of assessment in, the rest - having a turn 1-2 manoeuvre plan before the game starts, for example - will come with time. Just begin with "what does a good and bad engagement for your squad look like?" in broad handfuls.

Most important recommendation: don't keep changing - keep the same squad and maybe the same setup, and try to figure out what went wrong in game #1, and try something different from the same startpoint . Because comparing on a level playing field is a bit part of figuring out whether option (a) is better than (b).

I definitely tried some of that. After game 2, I asked him why he thought my first rock placement was always dead center. In game 3, when he bemoaned a third game in a row where he wasn't going to fire a torp, I asked him why he did a 1 straight. When he said to get a shot, I asked him if there was any chance of me going slow enough for him to torp me with any of my ships. He kind of seemed to get it, but he's still asking the wrong question. Instead of asking why your 41pt generic isn't firing torpedoes, he needs to asking why his 90+ point ace keeps getting dropped without doing meaningful damage.

-

I tried to lead him in that direction by asking some questions about Boba's positioning a board state, but it didn't seem to click too terribly well that that pilot was the biggest and least effectual part of the list all 3 games.

-

I've talked about it before with the skill plateau, but if a player isn't recognizing when their skill set is incomplete enough that they need to fundamentally adjust how they view the game, it can be hard to offer meaningful advice because their criteria for judging performance of themselves and individual game elements is just not aligned well enough.

15 hours ago, MasterShake2 said:

After game 2, I asked him why he thought my first rock placement was always dead center.

Right, but that's a 'level two' question - why is your opponent doing what they're doing. Stage one of improvement is figuring out what you need to do yourself.

Did he have any idea why he was putting his obstacles where he placed them ? Asking someone to explain their own actions tends to be a more leading question than asking them to explain someone else's.

I recall being told the following guidelines - it was actually to do with sword-fighting but the logic applies to most games and sports.

Solve problems in this order of priority if possible:

Stage One: Don't Lose

Stage Two: Don't Let Your Opponent Win

Stage Three: Win

15 hours ago, MasterShake2 said:

game 3, when he bemoaned a third game in a row where he wasn't going to fire a torp, I asked him why he did a 1 straight. When he said to get a shot, I asked him if there was any chance of me going slow enough for him to torp me with any of my ships. He kind of seemed to get it, but he's still asking the wrong question.

Yes and no. Understanding why any one piece isn't doing it's job is a good start. I agree, fixating on the generic goon in a Y-wing isn't the right place to start improving, but improving any element of the squad's performance is a positive thing. If he understands that slow moving the Y-wing (a) isn't going to get it a shot and (b) is going to get it killed, and does something else so that neither he nor you get a shot before the squads break apart, then at the point the two squads re-engaged, he would have had the possibility of having the Y-wing to get in the way....which means, in turn (in an ideal world), Luke being blocked by the Y-wing instead of Fenn being blocked by Luke, or one of you Y-wings being blocked and unable to fire torpedoes (a 2-dice popgun isn't going to hurt a protectorate fighter meaningfully).

It is the wrong place to focus efforts for maximum results, though.

15 hours ago, MasterShake2 said:

Instead of asking why your 41pt generic isn't firing torpedoes, he needs to asking why his 90+ point ace keeps getting dropped without doing meaningful damage. 

I tried to lead him in that direction by asking some questions about Boba's positioning a board state, but it didn't seem to click too terribly well that that pilot was the biggest and least effectual part of the list all 3 games

I would have started with a simple question: "Which ship did you the least good for its cost?" If he's not getting that the Firespray isn't pulling it's weight, then point that out. It is only your opinion (albeit a sensible, justifiable one), but that puts the emphasis clearly on "this guy is half my squad and keeps dying like a punk".

15 hours ago, MasterShake2 said:

I've talked about it before with the skill plateau, but if a player isn't recognizing when their skill set is incomplete enough that they need to fundamentally adjust how they view the game, it can be hard to offer meaningful advice because their criteria for judging performance of themselves and individual game elements is just not aligned well enough.

I would suggest that if he's not analysing the game results well, a very effective tool for improvement is to wind things back a bit. Too many moving parts makes it hard to judge where in a system failure is occurring (as opposed to where consequences appear).

I'm a big advocate of common-ship squads. Largely because I play Imperial and think it makes the aesthetic look infinitely better, but also because multiple ships with the same dial and actions means you actually learn to think deployment, movement and tactics, not combo-combo-combo card ability chains. Plus, learning to manoeuvre 4-5 identical ships through narrower gaps helps you learn to avoid obstacles and self-blocking and learn to use blocking yourself. If he's repeatedly getting blocked at the critical moment, this may be a good thing (plus, generic pilots are harder to block because they tend to move first!). Honing your skills with a quartet of protectorates or Y-wings, or a quintet of Khiraxz, for example.

If you point out "in all three games, your stuff ran into my stuff and lost actions at critical moments" then thinking about how to make a squad tolerant of that is a sensible idea. Fett, for example, is relatively tolerant of blocking (as far as big ships can be) because he gets a decent number of dice and rerolls for having enemy ships nearby. But it's obviously not good enough , because he keeps getting hammered.

• Slave 1 is cheap (ish) and lets you 'flip' the direction of a bank move at the last moment. Since Fett has rear guns (and boost if needed), this can turn a right bank straight into a blocking ship into a left bank, and either get you an exchange of range 1 shot at the intended blocker (but you get to reroll dice and they don't), or a range 2 shot after a boost where they don't get to shoot back.
• Unkar Plutt is even cheaper - because he inflicts self-damage. However it allows you to react to being blocked by losing a shield for a free white action - and the Firespray's boost is white, allowing you to leap over the blocker - and potentially out of the arc of whoever was expecting you to be trapped in front of them - shoot the blocker with the Firespray's tail guns, and potentially finish them off with a proximity mine (if carrying any) the following turn.

This makes me realize how little I know about this game.

“The traditional setup for this list is to put a rock squarely in the middle and have the pair of Y-Wings navigate the asteroid field using it as a pseudo screen to make directly jousting them undesirable which makes it easier to line up the        torps. Luke usually chills in the main jousting lane to tempt my opponent into a face-off that the Y-Wings can then turn into and get multiple torp shots on. Wedge has the highest initiative and can flex into the main lane or      to assist the Y's depending on my opponent's deploy  ment and frequently I'll drop him in a position where a  turn 1 barrel roll can get him to either location. ”

what do you mean by main jousting lane?

It sound like you deploy the two Y wings together and have wedge luke together as well?

Some times the best way to show this to people is to switch lists. I am new to X wing. I just joined with 2.0 and have 3 whole games to my name. Having said that I have been playing miniature based war games for decades. I have dealt with your just playing an Over Powered list I cant beat your because your army is too to powerful before in other games. One of the ways I was taught to deal with this is offer to play a rematch, preferably on the same day with the same table/terrain and play your opponents list while they get to play yours. In alot of cases if your dealing with a lower skill/experience player you will still win and they get to see the game from your side, and hopefully realize that your not just playing an over powered list that they never had any chance to beat. its not always effective but if one of the primary complaints is your stuff is OP they will jump to play the OP list and then after you beat them they often start to realize its about choices made on the table and threat identification. I will also say that some times you have to realize not everyone is a Patton or a Rommel and they for various reasons will just never get it and your always going to be playing on a different level.

As someone who is feeling like your friend is, it is interesting to see "get better" from the other perspective. And I'm saying that in a good way. A buddy of mine bests me most of the time, and last time I played him, I won a match basically cuz my roles were divine and his were hellish. The second game he once again outflew me and dice didn't save me. He tries to point things out to me and I kinda scratch my head at a bit of it. Predicting movement of the opponent is one thing he tells me quite a bit, and I hear that and its a bit harder said than done. I mean I understand target prioritization, but I think some of it is just being able to keep your head in the game and do what you practice. Im thinking predicting your opponent is more of "where would I attack me?" and "What are my weaknesses?" am I right? Also, I probably just need to get more games in lol

I can relate to the issues your oppo had/has.

While playing v1, I struggled, big time. Probably due to just concentrating on my ships, with little concern for the other side.

Played my first couple of games of v2 on Monday and in between v1 and v2 must have had some kind of epiphany.

I was actually thinking about where my oppos ships would be, and therefore where did I want to be.

Continually losing (as I did in v1, with the occasional rare victory) isn't good from a personal point of view and led me to withdraw from v1 for a while (turned to playing Armada, which I've done much better at for some reason).

Maybe it was Armada, and those that taught me the game, maybe it was something else, but just the simple (?) step up to thinking where my oppos ships will be has both helped me in game (one victory and one narrow loss all down to a blank green dice!) and renewed my enthusiasm for X-Wing.

Hope your pal learns/takes advice.

I'm a bit of a talker and tend to just yak over things I found interesting in what we'd each chosen to do and why and what went wrong etc. etc.

I think the main thing about spotting the next level for yourself is finding out why your opponent went where they did. What they were looking for in their approaches.

If I were in your shoes, I'd probably just waffle on and on about why I set up the way I did, what I thought he might do and maybe how I'd react if he did something different.

Explain your control of the game and he might just get that there's a larger game state that he could think about. Then it's not so technical and abstract as discussing particular moves he could make, it's more about seeing the bigger picture. The areas you wanted to see action in, with who and why.

I'm finding that as you get to see that, you become more attuned to the relative strengths and weaknesses of what's on the table and can then think about specific moves in a new context. Until recently, my thoughts were just what templates fit where.

But if he doesn't get it, welp. It just might take a bit longer to sink in. Or he's simply not interested in going to that level.

First, he needs to understand blocking and that he is moving last with basically a two ship list, so he has to be arc dodging and playing cautiously. Fett should be using that rear arc more than the front. Maybe he needs training wheels and put Slave I title on Fett. Fenn should be boosting in and bugging out and making another pass. And Fenn should never spend that focus on offense unless its for a kill shot. His choice of a ywing with torpedo is his problem. It would benefit him more to have a Quadjumper, Escape Shuttle coordinating, etc. He doesnt need more punch, he needs support help.

One way to help, is rewind to key moments of the match, just place ships approximately where they were and ask "Why did you do this move?" or "Where did you think I was going? Why?"

Now you can dissect his brain and train of thought and help him out. A lot of time I just tell people to have patience. Many just want to get in to joust mode and start chucking dice. Once they learn patience, and that not everyone is going to play THEIR GAME, then they start doing a little better.

This was a very interesting post, as I have followed your «Y so serious” thread. Please explain what you mean by main jousting lane. That is a new term for me. My thought hearing that expression it is either on the side of the board, or a lane between the asteroids.

5 hours ago, Minimono said:

This was a very interesting post, as I have followed your «Y so serious” thread. Please explain what you mean by main jousting lane. That is a new term for me. My thought hearing that expression it is either on the side of the board, or a lane between the asteroids.

It's just whatever generally open area your opponents looks like they want to joust you in. Usually it's on the left or right side of the board where it's asteroid free which keeps options open, but it can be in the middle.

For an ur example, i.e. somebody that seemed to be more critically thinking about the game in was that made it easier to help him, I had a match later that night against a different opponent using a different list (IG-88, Han, 4lom).

He put both IG and 4lom in the asteroid field, but separated from each other by a at least range 2 and, because of the distribution of rocks, they couldn't easily get to each other. Han was driving along the table edge closest to IG. I formed a pretty quick plan of having Luke solo 4Lom while Wedge and the Y's moved in on IG and Han. First turn of fighting, a Y-Wing moved for a block on IG while locking Han and the Second Y followed with a lock on IG along with Wedge. Next turn, both Y's hard 2ed into locks on Han. Han got away from one, but the trailing Y still got a shot off and the trailing Y's move also blocked IG again in a position where he'd get shot by Wedge. At this point, Luke had dispatched 4lom and had turned in to assist. Next turn, IG K-Turns, then Wedge drops behind him with his own K-Turn as Luke Hard 3's into a position behind IG as the remaining Y Hard 2's for another attempt at Han. Next turn the IG moves forward and both Luke and Wedge drop in behind him for the kill. At this point, he declares that he has to go and he doesn't think Han at 4hp survives the 2 full health aces, despite getting both of the Y-Wings, but asks the right question, "did you know I'd be there?". My was a simple, "No, but that's the right question." I proceeded to take advantage of the time he had left in the shop to rewind the positions as best we could.

1) I pointed out that not only was 4lom out of position, but when confronted with Luke, he turned away from his allies. This kept me from having to make meaningful choices and I could just drop Luke in behind him and power him into the ground without having to worry about his wingmen.

2) I rewound IG's position all the way to the start of the match and pointed out that, at no point in this process did he really have options other than a potential disengage. The placement of rocks and his path through them was painfully obviously defined. I also pointed out that the first 2 blocks from Y's still had them shooting torps at Han. In short, it was a 0 cost block as it wasn't stopping me from getting actions or even a torp, so there was no reason not to do it based on the positioning of the different elements. Even if he disengaged, I still had the shot and position I needed and the same was true of the second Y block on IG. We then looked at Wedge's K-Turn and, for this, I basically showed him all possible IG maneuvers and then showed him the K-turn, it was at least neutral (both getting shots, or neither getting shots) or positive (me getting a shot without him getting one) in every location he could go, so again, given the relative hp of both ships, I was fine with this. Then for the maneuver out of the K-Turn, I just pointed out that if I did the slowest possible maneuver while behind him, his medium base couldn't block me and with both boost and roll options, I could easily chase him regardless, it just happened that I didn't have to and could lock. TL:DR, even though I didn't specifically know what IG was doing, it didn't matter for any of the Y-Wing or Wedge's maneuvers because it all made sense regardless.

For this opponent, the light did seem to go off. He seemed to realize that it was less about knowing specifically what he would do and more about getting a general flight path and going for maneuvers that would work pretty much regardless.

Critical thinking skills are difficult, but can be learned. I dated a professor who was part of a committee on how to promote critical thinking skills in students, so don't feel bad if not everyone learns from your explanations - we all respond differently to information. I've tried to explain some of my philosophies in X-wing to some new players and they've taken it well, but then I also knew these particular players were solid critical thinkers, so they picked up concepts very quickly.

Overall, your opponent's major issue is their own self-analysis. They're blaming their failure on the models and not their own tactics. This is actually surprisingly common (it's one of the reasons we have so many threads about ships being overpriced or underpriced - there are some valid points out there but a lot of nonsense). Learning from mistakes is really the best way to learn, but you have to be open to learning and understand what the initial mistake was. The old adage about war, "He who makes the least mistakes, wins" is very apt in describing any competitive experience.

I don't know that you could have done anything different in helping your opponent in the aftermath. It's great that you tried though. I'd be interested to see if their next games may be better - sometimes it just takes some time for new concepts to sink in. It could very well be the frustration of fresh failure was clouding their ability to look at their own performance objectively. Not all of us have an instant reset button. Play him again - maybe he'll kick your butt!

so I flew this Y list you use last night twice. Against the same opponent and same list. I have flown it twice before against my son as well. My opponent last night is flat out better than me. No ifs or maybes. He plays a lot and wins a lot. Nice guy.

His list:

wedge with R4, naked ten numb, Nora Y with ion and veteran turret gunner plus Arvel with intimidation.

we had the same point. First game he was moving last shooting last.

Second was reversed.

I put the biggest rock in the middle both matches, and the rocks were more or less in a cluster of range 1-2 around the central rock.

i just couldn’t figure out how to time the maneuvering to get torpedos off. Shot one in the two matches.

I don’t get it ?

maybe my critical thinker is broken ?