5 hours ago, FlyingAnchors said:

Disney actually tried around 2014 to make an arcade style flight sim game. It was online arena based (think like Wowp/ WT arcade mode) but it had X-wings, Y-wings, Tie Fighters. There were even different variants, like you started off with the T-65a and could progress and unlock up to like the T-65d. Eventually it ended up getting cancelled. Not sure why.

Star Wars Attack Squadrons. I know someone who played in the beta test, and really, really liked it. I was very annoyed it didn't get released and we got EA's stuff instead.

7 hours ago, FlyingAnchors said:

Disney actually tried around 2014 to make an arcade style flight sim game. It was online arena based (think like Wowp/ WT arcade mode) but it had X-wings, Y-wings, Tie Fighters. There were even different variants, like you started off with the T-65a and could progress and unlock up to like the T-65d. Eventually it ended up getting cancelled. Not sure why.

While I would love a game like that, until EA loses their exclusive license, you’re probably better off finding an old GameCube or PS-2 and playing the rogue squadron games to scratch that itch. Don’t get me wrong, Star fighter assault is cool, but has a different feel.

Actually come to think of it there was a homemade shootem up flight sim made where you could either do the trench run or battle or Endor. It was free on github, I don’t remember what it was called though.

This is getting a little off topic, but did you try the VR mission in Battlefront? I'd love to see more of that, but let me fly a TIE Interceptor please.

9 hours ago, FlyingAnchors said:

While I would love a game like that, until EA loses their exclusive license, you’re probably better off finding an old GameCube or PS-2 and playing the rogue squadron games to scratch that itch. Don’t get me wrong, Star fighter assault is cool, but has a different feel.

How were the Rogue Squadron games? After playing the PC games, I can't help but think that limiting commands to what a controller van handle would be a bit simplistic.

Also, are they 1st-person or 3rd-person view?

8 minutes ago, JJ48 said:

How were the Rogue Squadron games? After playing the PC games, I can't help but think that limiting commands to what a controller van handle would be a bit simplistic.

Also, are they 1st-person or 3rd-person view?

3p by default and excellent except for the weird on foot segments in 3

6 minutes ago, thespaceinvader said:

3p by default and excellent except for the weird on foot segments in 3

Eh, 3P is a pretty big drawback in my book. I want to feel like I'm flying a ship; not watching one being flown.

57 minutes ago, JJ48 said:

Eh, 3P is a pretty big drawback in my book. I want to feel like I'm flying a ship; not watching one being flown.

You can do in ship cam if you want I think. It's been a while...

1 hour ago, JJ48 said:

Eh, 3P is a pretty big drawback in my book. I want to feel like I'm flying a ship; not watching one being flown.

Agreed, thankfully you can switch it to first person.

I always played that way and rarely found it limiting like the new Battlefront game where you can't see anything from cockpit view. you could even use the c-stick to look around while in the cockpit...now I wanna go play haha.

I love the PC sim games, and Rouge Squadron games are a bit more arcade style, but they're not too far off the mark that they don't scratch the fly-an-x-wing itch.

4 hours ago, Okapi said:

This is getting a little off topic, but did you try the VR mission in Battlefront? I'd love to see more of that, but let me fly a TIE Interceptor please.

Definitely. I loved K-2SO's cameo, too.

On 2/3/2019 at 3:38 PM, kempokid said:

No matter what list I have, my tendency is to immediately try to go straight into the action and joust with my opponent. I think it's because when I first got into the game, I was using 3 B-wing or 3 A-wing lists. I would fly in, shoot off ordinance (RIP Harpoons), and get out.

However, the lists I'm learning to fly with 2.0 aren't quite set up the same way but I keep falling back into the pattern of going into the action sooner than I should, especially when I'm out-numbered.

I just listened to the most recent Radio TCX podcast where Carson Wray (I'd tag him if I knew he was on here or what his user name is) talked about his strategy in Phoneix last week using a Poe, Numb, and L'ulo list. Given the lower health of these ships, he talked about avoiding jousts and working on flanking the opponent. Obviously he's better than the average X-Wing player but I'd still like some basic insights into how to set a plan like that in motion.

This is a long-winded way to say, what can you do to avoid the itch to joust?

The first point where you decide how your list will be flying is in the squad building phase. Some ships are simply not meant to be flankers (while on the other hand all ships are capable of jousting).

A good flanker ship must have good maneuverability, high initiative pilots, preferably both boost and barel roll actions, and ideally also some linked action for having both reposition and dice modification in one turn.

Each ship in the game has different capabilities for this, and here comes the second crucial point to decide how you should fly - it's when you sit down across your opponent and measure up his squad.

If your opponent has better flanker ships (higher initiative, faster dials, etc), then you should consider switching back to jousting, because you will have problems out-flying him.

On the other hand if your ships have maneuvering advantage, then NOT jousting is likely the correct answer.

If you're flying a triple Ace list with not too much HP, then you probably should engage in a bait-and-switch opening. You can bait your opponent with one ship (by feigning a joust), while the others are working on getting on his flank.

Once your opponent commits to engage your bait, you want to run with it asap before it gets punished. If you succeed, then your opponent will likely turn his attention to your flankers, so they need to become the bait now and run away, while your previous bait becomes a new flanker.

This way of flying is indeed very difficult and precarious and one small mistake can easily cost you a game. For an example, see the Haighwood vs. Howard match from Hoth Open 2017 (below).

Therefore I would not recommend flying straight 3 flanker aces unless you really have a ton of experiences with them.

A much easier squad to fly would be if you choose 2 Aces and 1 Tank.

You can then offer your opponent your Tank, who should be able to keep him occupied, while your aces get into flanking positions.

Example of such lists could be (already mentioned) Redline / Whisper / Soontir. But there are many options across the factions (for example good tank ships would be Lt. Tavson or 4-Lom, which you can combine with Silencers or Fangs as flankers).

)

6 hours ago, baranidlo said:

A much easier squad to fly would be if you choose 2 Aces and 1 Tank.

I've tried to build this for FO, but it's pretty challenging. You have to choose either QD or Kylo if you also want an Upsilon. So you're left with QD/Kylo and an FO alongside an Upsilon.

Something like:

TIE/sf Fighter - •“Quickdraw” - 59
•“Quickdraw” - Defiant Duelist (45)
Fanatical (2)
Fire-Control System (2)
Special Forces Gunner (10)

TIE/fo Fighter - •“Midnight” - 58
•“Midnight” - Omega Leader (44)
•Squad Leader (14)

Upsilon -class Shuttle - •Lieutenant Tavson - 81
•Lieutenant Tavson - Obedient Shuttle Pilot (62)
Collision Detector (6)
Perceptive Copilot (8)
Advanced Optics (4)
Biohexacrypt Codes (1)

Total: 198/200

View in the X-Wing Squad Builder

7 hours ago, baranidlo said:

If you're flying a triple Ace list with not too much HP, then you  proba  bly  should engage in a bait-and-switch opening. You can bait your  opponent with one ship (by feigning a joust), whi  l  e the others are working on getting on his flank.     

This is where I make my killing. I’m really good at what I call the shell game. Feinting in and out from position, switching ships over, and altering the angle of attack.

Always leave a plan B. Make your opponent turn in towards one area of the board, and have an escape plan for the ship there. Sometimes it means hard one boost boogie, others go full tilt ahead and get behind.

With Soontir the best move is one that allows you to either escape, or engage, depending on what your opponent does. He is allergic to getting shot, never forget that.

Why I love Strikers in general, and Duchess in particular. Her ability may not seem as good as the other two, but IMO it is the best. Try blocking her, go ahead, I dare you. Minimum 3 ship job, and often impossible. Rare is the time I’ve bumped with her that wasn’t either intentional, or because I screwed up my own ships

20 hours ago, kempokid said:

I've tried to build this for FO, but it's pretty challenging. You have to choose either QD or Kylo if you also want an Upsilon. So you're left with QD/Kylo and an FO alongside an Upsilon.

Something like:

TIE/sf Fighter - •“Quickdraw” - 59
•“Quickdraw” - Defiant Duelist (45)
Fanatical (2)
Fire-Control System (2)
Special Forces Gunner (10)

TIE/fo Fighter - •“Midnight” - 58
•“Midnight” - Omega Leader (44)
•Squad Leader (14)

Upsilon -class Shuttle - •Lieutenant Tavson - 81
•Lieutenant Tavson - Obedient Shuttle Pilot (62)
Collision Detector (6)
Perceptive Copilot (8)
Advanced Optics (4)
Biohexacrypt Codes (1)

Total: 198/200

View in the X-Wing Squad Builder

I think you have a solid base there, but the list looks a bit unoptimized to me.

Squad Leader for 14 points is too expensive, and you already have coordinate action on Tavson.

Midnight herself is not so great ship in 2.0.

Tavson has too many upgrades for a ship, which you plan on letting die, and some of them bring very little for their cost (e.g. Perceptive Copilot).

So I would recommend dropping most of the upgrades from Tavson, and exchanging Midnight for Blackout.

I have been playing Tavson/QuickDraw/Blackout myself recently in Hyperspace format, and it performed pretty good so far..

EDIT: Also don't forget to keep a healthy bid, I would recommend at least 6 points. Both Quickdraw and Blackout like to move after opponent's ships, and it will help you a lot to get them into flanking positions (although QuickDraw is more of a knife-fighter than flanker).

On ‎2‎/‎6‎/‎2019 at 1:18 PM, baranidlo said:

The first point where you decide how your list will be flying is in the squad building phase. Some ships are simply not meant to be flankers (while on the other hand all ships are capable of jousting).

A good flanker ship must have good maneuverability, high initiative pilots, preferably both boost and barel roll actions, and ideally also some linked action for having both reposition and dice modification in one turn.

Each ship in the game has different capabilities for this, and here comes the second crucial point to decide how you should fly - it's when you sit down across your opponent and measure up his squad.

If your opponent has better flanker ships (higher initiative, faster dials, etc), then you should consider switching back to jousting, because you will have problems out-flying him.

On the other hand if your ships have maneuvering advantage, then NOT jousting is likely the correct answer.

If you're flying a triple Ace list with not too much HP, then you probably should engage in a bait-and-switch opening. You can bait your opponent with one ship (by feigning a joust), while the others are working on getting on his flank.

Once your opponent commits to engage your bait, you want to run with it asap before it gets punished. If you succeed, then your opponent will likely turn his attention to your flankers, so they need to become the bait now and run away, while your previous bait becomes a new flanker.

Really appreciate the way you discuss this.

Don't try to get over jousting - Embrace it - feel the power of the jousters

The best way to get over jousting syndrome is to, instead, embrace it entirely, hone it in, and become the best alpha strike player you can be. It also gives you the advantage in a number of matches because it moves tempo into your favor.

I support 2 aces and 1 tank.

I like to “anchor” my squadron to one piece (like a shuttle) that both me and my opponent has an idea of where could end up, but is hard to deal with anyways. That way my aces actually has more freedom of movement, and can avoid the joust, because I have more control over where the joust will happen.

@kempokid , this may have been stated already, but I tend to follow the 'ol 1.0 mindset that if two players are jousting (merging), then one of them is wrong.

Keep getting those games in, and you'll eventually understand how each ship is a building block of a larger set of strategies - a toolbox, if you will - which you use to adapt your opening based on the matchup.

If you're specifically running generic-efficiency jousting lists, then plan to get ahead on points early or lose in the end-game.

3 hours ago, baranidlo said:

I think you have a solid base there, but the list looks a bit unoptimized to me.

Squad Leader for 14 points is too expensive, and you already have coordinate action on Tavson.

Midnight herself is not so great ship in 2.0.

Tavson has too many upgrades for a ship, which you plan on letting die, and some of them bring very little for their cost (e.g. Perceptive Copilot).

So I would recommend dropping most of the upgrades from Tavson, and exchanging Midnight for Blackout.

I have been playing Tavson/QuickDraw/Blackout myself recently in Hyperspace format, and it performed pretty good so far..

EDIT: Also don't forget to keep a healthy bid, I would recommend at least 6 points. Both Quickdraw and Blackout like to move after opponent's ships, and it will help you a lot to get them into flanking positions (although QuickDraw is more of a knife-fighter than flanker).

I've been running Recoil/QD/Tavson so I just copied over my QD and Tavson build from that. I agree that Midnight isn't as great, but it's the highest initiative I could fit with what was left. Two coordinates could be interesting as Midnight could coordinate to QD while maneuvering and Tavson's ability could coordinate to QD or Midnight after taking fire. I don't like the list, but following the idea of two aces and a tank, that's what I got.

1 hour ago, ThinkingB said:

The best way to get over jousting syndrome is to, instead, embrace it entirely, hone it in, and become the best alpha strike player you can be. It also gives you the advantage in a number of matches because it moves tempo into your favor.

2 hours ago, freakyg3 said:

Don't try to get over jousting - Embrace it - feel the power of the jousters

Unless the list you're flying is at a statistical disadvantage to doing this. That's my point of the post. I'm using this mentality to lists that should not be used in this manner, so I've been looking for feedback to break the habits.

1 hour ago, kempokid said:

Unless the list you're flying is at a statistical disadvantage to doing this. That's my point of the post. I'm using this mentality to lists that should not be used in this manner, so I've been looking for feedback to break the habits.

I should elaborate. I'm a big believer in the "make your jousting list appear as if it's not a jousting list" philosophy. Thus, every single one of my lists is designed to go straight at the enemy and cause as much damage and chaos as possible. However, this doesn't always mean that they will look like this type of list. For example, the best jousting list I was able to make in 2.0 was repeatedly described on the forums as a weak jousting list, not very strong, not a real joust list, etc., but on the table, it was an absolute monster that only cared about getting up in the opponents face and ruining their plans. It was such as "weak jousting list" that it went up by a solid 12 points after JAN_28. The point in all of this is to say that you don't have to ever get over jousting syndrome if it is your goal and something you plan around with every component in your list. If you find yourself jousting a lot, it might make more sense for you to play it up, rather than force yourself to learn a new engagement strategy that isn't as logical to you as "run straight at them and punch them in the face".