I don´ t get why they simplified the pilot skills down to 6 levels. Removing Veteran Instincts was great, but everyone got sandwiched together it seems. What would be the case if initiatives were increased threefold up to 18 as a possibility. (Wedge gets 16, Vader 17, Han 18, for example) Wouldn´ t it eliminate this bidding war and open up each squad to its full potential?

58 minutes ago, Larky Bobble said:

I don´ t get why they simplified the pilot skills down to 6 levels. Removing Veteran Instincts was great, but everyone got sandwiched together it seems. What would be the case if initiatives were increased threefold up to 18 as a possibility. (Wedge gets 16, Vader 17, Han 18, for example) Wouldn´ t it eliminate this bidding war and open up each squad to its full potential?

the issue isn't there being fewer initiatives, the issue is every squad fielding I5/6 pilots and nobody fielding the I1-4s (because they're bad)

3 hours ago, svelok said:

the issue isn't there being fewer initiatives, the issue is every squad fielding I5/6 pilots and nobody fielding the I1-4s (because they're bad)

My TIE swarm would like a word...

2 hours ago, Sir Orrin said:

My TIE swarm would like a word...

My Jakku Gunrunners will push them to the back of the line!

18 hours ago, Koing907 said:

My Jakku Gunrunners will push them to the back of the line!

Not if they're facing the front of the line.

you know a lot of this could have been solved by more stratification... instead of scrunching all the pilot skill into 6 slots bump it out to 12... have no idea WHY they decided to only have 6 ps slots... at least with 12 you could differentiate better.. lol didn't see Larkey's post...

On January 6, 2019 at 3:39 PM, svelok said:

the issue isn't there being fewer initiatives, the issue is every squad fielding I5/6 pilots and nobody fielding the I1-4s (because they're bad)

If you reread page one, you should see a remarkable amount of posts about bidding and the initiative and approximately none about the lack of lower skilled pilots...

Hence my post.

If Kylo were to be on the low end of a broader pilot skill range (Kylo 13, Guri 14, Luke 15, for example) people would moan about him less, and he could beef out his build. There would be less incentive to make bids with more options...

There really is no question: compressing the Initiatives (Pilot Skills) made bidding worse. I have to admit that I'm only seeing it in hindsight, but now, looking at it, it is both obvious and inevitable.

I'm not sure it's fixable at this point. Except by changing First Player and eliminating bidding.

If anybody is interested in a data point, Week 6 of the S&V Aces League has 12 lists, including 10 Init6 pilots (plus Null) and 14 Init5 pilots. Only one list (Duncan Howard) doesn't have an I5 or I6 pilot.

(Of course, it is called the Aces League ... )

I didn't look closely enough to verify that it was a fully Hyperspace league, BTW, but I can't think of any exceptions off-hand.

7 hours ago, Jeff Wilder said:

There really is no question: compressing the Initiatives (Pilot Skills) made bidding worse. I have to admit that I'm only seeing it in hindsight, but now, looking at it, it is both obvious and inevitable.

I'm not sure it's fixable at this point. Except by changing First Player and eliminating bidding.

What makes you think it is the cause of compressing initiatives as opposed to cost or lack of tools that existed to deal with aces/higher PS (more effective bombs, turrets in the previous edition?) I'm genuinely curious, as I haven't put a lot of thought into it. I'm sure it could be a combination of those, too, but it seems like you're pinpointing the compression of it as the cause of bidding. I'm also remember ridiculous bids in first edition that would amount to 14-24 point bids in second edition (the dreaded academy pilot and two phantoms).

To add, I just looked at the aces league and I'd consider most bids modest by the standard of 1st edition as most are running 5-8 point bids if any at all (even with PS6 pilots), with one bid of 16. Now, it does look like PS is being pushed but -- at least from that sample -- bidding isn't too crazy (at least relative to 1st edition).

The primary reason is the compression of points on a chassis between bottom-top pilot.

This has been exacerbated by compressing Initiative values and removing VI.

Its three mistakes rolled into one, but they can fix it all through costs.

Though I'd say that VI would not have the same opportunit cost in 2.0 as it had in 1.0 with several musthave EPTs. In that sense, removing VI was not a mistake.

No, I think it is because it locks in the advantages of the printed initiative. It just needed to be adequately costed - maybe scaling with base Initiative? - which it clearly wasn't in 1.0.

I definitely agree for scaling cost. And I assume that a VI would only give +1 due to the compression, not again +2.

Fixed cost has to be high enough - and is interestingly enough unavailable for force users. That in itself would be very important. But there is still no opportunity cost. You get the same effect by high cost, and I agree to that. But I hadn't thought of scaling cost, and any meaningful cost for an I5 and I6 would make it meaningless for all I1-4.

Doubling points (more places to shave half a point off a list) and diminishing upgrades (more reasons to not spend points) also affect how much people want to bid

44 minutes ago, GreenDragoon said:

I definitely agree for scaling cost. And I assume that a VI would only give +1 due to the compression, not again +2.

Fixed cost has to be high enough - and is interestingly enough unavailable for force users. That in itself would be very important. But there is still no opportunity cost. You get the same effect by high cost, and I agree to that. But I hadn't thought of scaling cost, and any meaningful cost for an I5 and I6 would make it meaningless for all I1-4.

I never really understood why VI got the bad rep it had in 1.0. PS Wars would have happened with or without it (as we're seeing now) and at least VI allowed more pilots to get involved in them.

4 hours ago, SOTL said:

I never really understood why VI got the bad rep it had in 1.0. PS Wars would have happened with or without it (as we're seeing now) and at least VI allowed more pilots to get involved in them.

My stance was always that VI was ok. But with the opportunity cost in mind when it's just 1pt. Otherwise it's too cheap. VI vs PTL, expertise, ASTS, intensity or lone wolf was an important choice.

Funnily enough I had some (heated...) discussions where I was saying that lack of VI would lead to more bidding wars. And here we are with 10pt bids being normal and necessary for several lists. And being used on lists that clearly don't need it, too.

e: I'll fact check me when I get away from mobile only

So, checkhing whether my memory is right. Looks like I've held this opinion for roughly a year now, but had a different one initially that I forgot about. Not that it matters but I was curious. Here are 3 examples:

On 3/1/2018 at 7:57 PM, GreenDragoon said:

All but the 12 ships at PS9 have to give up their EPT slot to be suddenly so viable as you predict it. Plus they have to take a large enough bid. While the PS9 ships have their EPT slot freed up. I'd love me some Intensity or Juke Vader, or IntensityPoe, or ExpertiseDengar, or PTL Kylo, or PTL Soontir. Freeing their EPT slot makes them better compared to the PS7 and PS8 ships, not worse.

And then there's the bid. Currently a highPS list has a bid between 1 and 3 points. Removing VI gives me a 4pt bid, some will even have 5pt bids. With free EPT slots! Do you realize how good ASTS on Quickdraw is? Or Trickshot? I'll gladly take the extra die.

On 3/2/2018 at 8:43 AM, GreenDragoon said:

ExpertiseQD has a significantly higher winrate in this regional season, telling us that while VI is most common at 74%, it is also not the best choice and QD pays extra for taking it. Splitting the data into VI QD with or without harpoons confirms that: ExpertiseQD > VIpoonQD > VIQD. The people taking VI on QD without a Harpoon did not understand why VI is taken in the first place, and their results reflect that.

[...]

Everyone else (the 66 remaining PS7-8 with VI, or 9 with adaptability) has the potential problem of running into a PS11 pilot and completely waste the bid. Not to mention that 3-6pt bids are already a thing, and that‘s when the field is limited to those 12 pilots. Of which, as mentioned, only four don‘t lose as much by taking VI. 

It looks like I had a different opinion in November 2017 (not sure why I thought so, see bolded part).

On 11/26/2017 at 2:04 AM, GreenDragoon said:

Right now VI prevents an initiative race to the bottom because you can never outbid a PS11 unless you also have one yourself, which is not always possible. But introducing that hard ceiling at PS9 would most likely shift the PS war into an initiative war - which might have worse effects. 

Personally I would prefer the initiative war though. 

1 hour ago, SOTL said:

I never really understood why VI got the bad rep it had in 1.0. PS Wars would have happened with or without it (as we're seeing now) and at least VI allowed more pilots to get involved in them.

In another way, though, it pushed out pilots that really needed something else in that slot to be competitive and then got jumped over by other ships (or didn't even have access to it). I think there's a case to be made that unless it was unreasonably costed (in the same way as Luke Gunner), it would be the EPT of choice right now easily,

1 hour ago, GreenDragoon said:

And here we are with 10pt bids being normal and necessary for several lists.

I've consistently seen 5-8 points as pretty typical, which I don't really think is out of step for first edition (though I'm not saying it was good then, either). I don't even think that 10 is that out of step, either at 5% of a list, that's essentially a significant upgrade....speaking of that...

2 hours ago, svelok said:

Doubling points (more places to shave half a point off a list) and diminishing upgrades (more reasons to not spend points) also affect how much people want to bid 

This is a great point. Without strong EPTs, or other upgrades moving last is just a better option.

4 hours ago, SOTL said:

but they can fix it all through costs.

In the end, this is probably where I think things sit -- in that Initiative bidding (and PS before) is very meta dependent, so the cost is fluid. At least they have the opportunity to be fluid with that meta, but whether or not they will or want to is probably a whole other thing.

Bids are really ******* irritating and a good show of how overwhelming an advantage moving later is (which is why FFG wisely gave lower intiative pilots more powerful abilities....right?)

Easiest fix ATM is more stuff that favors lower initiative, mainly ACTION stuff that can affect higher I before manuevering and make them wish they'd brought some kind of support in the form of...other ships that aren't expensive I 5s.

Hyperspace at least gives us Ebon (not an ACTION but same principle) for that, so if you don't wanna I 5 bid I guess you're playing him and Poe

Another way ffg could help would be to knock down the price of the Sense upgrade as well as lower initiative force users

13 hours ago, AlexW said:

What makes you think it is the cause of compressing initiatives as opposed to cost or lack of tools that existed to deal with aces/higher PS (more effective bombs, turrets in the previous edition?) I'm genuinely curious, as I haven't put a lot of thought into it. I'm sure it could be a combination of those, too, but it seems like you're pinpointing the compression of it as the cause of bidding.

I don't think that compression of Initiatives causes bidding. (How could I think that, when bidding existed prior to compression of Initiatives?) I simply think that it's evident that when there are fewer "move last" bands for pilots to be spread out among, more pilots will land in each band, and therefore bidding will escalate. (Which we've seen.)

The cause of bidding is simply that "move last," with perfect knowledge, is immensely powerful, and that power is not adequately reflected in the cost of pilots, ships, and upgrades that take the greatest advantage of the First Player rules when they move last.

43 minutes ago, Jeff Wilder said:

I don't think that compression of Initiatives causes bidding. (How could I think that, when bidding existed prior to compression of Initiatives?) I simply think that it's evident that when there are fewer "move last" bands for pilots to be spread out among, more pilots will land in each band, and therefore bidding will escalate. (Which we've seen.)

The cause of bidding is simply that "move last," with perfect knowledge, is immensely powerful, and that power is not adequately reflected in the cost of pilots, ships, and upgrades that take the greatest advantage of the First Player rules when they move last.

Right, what I meant to imply with the word "cause" was the in the larger context of why it has escalated and how the compression of initiative played into that -- not just what caused it in the first place. I think your point about pilots landing in similar bands of Initiative was the kind of thing I hadn't considered.

Having considered it more, I do think that there are other factors in play that include Initiative as an issue (like costing it correctly), but aren't limited to Initiative itself. In the current meta and 2nd ed ruleset, moving last is more valuable (there are fewer counters as options) and fewer options and less value to spend extra points. I think if the game would have kept pilot skill as it was, we'd still see bidding escalate in comparison to first edition. Initiative compression might be a part of that bidding escalation, but I think it's understandable that it was missed as it might not even one of the top three or four reasons it's occurring, if it is significantly different (and effective) from 1st ed.

On ‎1‎/‎6‎/‎2019 at 1:40 PM, Larky Bobble said:

I don´ t get why they simplified the pilot skills down to 6 levels. Removing Veteran Instincts was great, but everyone got sandwiched together it seems. What would be the case if initiatives were increased threefold up to 18 as a possibility. (Wedge gets 16, Vader 17, Han 18, for example) Wouldn´ t it eliminate this bidding war and open up each squad to its full potential?

I think this creates a fundamentally different problem. Bidding is not a problem, it's a symptom of how much of an advantage moving last can be. Bidding becomes necessary the more pilots are at the same level, but even if you reduced bidding by spacing the pilots out more, you don't remove the core advantage that bidding reflects. In fact, you've basically made it worse because there are fewer options to beat a dominant pilot.

I'm pretty convinced that it's nothing but positive for the game to remove bidding on favor of a simple die roll because it keeps players from leaning on the perfect knowledge crutch and shifts the focus to gameplay decisions.

For reference, I've been playing nothing but 0 bid squadrons since 2.0 came out and I don't feel it's hurt me in any game.

I'd like to fix the costs and see what shakes out. For instance Wedge is 52 and he should probably be more like 60-62. Cascade those sorts of changes through the field and see if we've still got this dominance of high-I pilots causing spiralling high bids.

39 minutes ago, Jeff Wilder said:

I simply think that it's evident that when there are fewer "move last" bands for pilots to be spread out among, more pilots will land in each band, and therefore bidding will escalate.

Do you think the lack of VI/Adaptability contributed to the escalation of bidding, or is the compression enough to explain it?

3 hours ago, AlexW said:

I've consistently seen 5-8 points as pretty typical, which I don't really think is out of step for first edition (though I'm not saying it was good then, either). I don't even think that 10 is that out of step, either at 5% of a list, that's essentially a significant upgrade....speaking of that... 

Edit: I thought your numbers are 1.0 points. If they aren't: I agree with you that they are typical now. But 8+ (in 2.0) being so frequent is new.

I don't believe you Bids deeper than 3 points were rather rare according to my memory. /u/rixslayer used to post about tournament results on reddit and to include the deepest bid and the average bid. The Atlanta regional had e.g. the deepest bid at 6 points, and just 14 lists out of 139 with 3 or more points. That's 10%, so 3pt bids were not rare, but deep bids were.

Going for all of January 2018 , which he compiled in a single thread: Lowest was 95 pt. Scum had a high percentage of almost 16% with deep bids (3+), rebels and imperials less so, but the overall was again 10%.

So I think that you are correct that they were pretty typcial, but only 3-5 points or even just 3-4 points, not 5-8. That was extremely rare.