[BLOG] XWD38: Debrief 5 - DROID v Kyle (Kylo + FOs vs Rebel Torp Alpha)

By dsul413, in X-Wing

Posted at
On 6/11/2019 at 1:45 AM, GreenDragoon said:

One more thing about debrief focus points.

For some reason, the (podcast)community doesn't like bat reps. Maybe that is because the format of podcasts is not exactly ideal for an extremely visual game.

But even in written form, battle reports can turn out way too long, something that I do myself. That is where Debrief Focus Points come into play.

They are such a great tool to distill and share the most crucial errors and lessons of a game, without all the additional baggage.

And they allow podcasters to get to the point after a minimal bit of context. The downside is the required effort. I found that I need the play by play for myself to accurately remember the game, but of course I could only share the essence instead of the details.

Maybe a short form bat rep would be interesting.

We will work on the short form bat rep, because I agree - its an interesting avenue to explore. That's the best part about this format, though - you run the play by play before you skinny down to DFPs and learning points, and then really you just need a top level summary of the action before getting to the learning when you provide it to others.

Posted at

Have you ever evaluated an opponent’s list, and categorized it as just like something else you’ve played against? Then, after playing, realized you were very wrong about how that list played, even though it had distinct similarities to another list?

Definitely. As noted, it can even be as simple as a single upgrade being different, like not remembering a player with a Decimator has found a slack handful of points to equip it with mines....

And yes, biases from unrealistic experience is very real. There's an old saying of " if it was stupid but it worked, it wasn't stupid."

This isn't a bad rule. But there is a subtext people often miss - if it's stupid but it worked once that doesn't mean it'll work again .

I have the same thing with TIE strikers. They have a thing they can do - really a loophole due to the way the Adaptive Ailerons rule is written - which lets them 'skin dance' through debris without suffering stress.

  • Aileron move onto the debris, with leading edge of base protruding on the other side
  • Receive Stress
  • Reveal Blue move
  • Execute Blue move
  • Remove Stress
  • Perform action as normal

It's a very nice trick and often catches people off-guard, especially now the TIE/sk has speed 2 blue banks, which are pretty fast when chained with the aileron move.

The downside? You have to roll one, single, unmodified attack die and not roll a critical . This is not hard, and it's a sensible tactic to use whenever it's advantageous to do so.

The fact that in the last 1st edition tournament I went to what actually happened was Major Explosion/Direct Hit shouldn't put me off it, but I have to keep consciously reminding myself of that.

Posted at
12 hours ago, Magnus Grendel said:

Definitely. As noted, it can even be as simple as a single upgrade being different, like not remembering a player with a Decimator has found a slack handful of points to equip it with mines....

And yes, biases from unrealistic experience is very real. There's an old saying of " if it was stupid but it worked, it wasn't stupid."

This isn't a bad rule. But there is a subtext people often miss - if it's stupid but it worked once that doesn't mean it'll work again .

I have the same thing with TIE strikers. They have a thing they can do - really a loophole due to the way the Adaptive Ailerons rule is written - which lets them 'skin dance' through debris without suffering stress.

  • Aileron move onto the debris, with leading edge of base protruding on the other side
  • Receive Stress
  • Reveal Blue move
  • Execute Blue move
  • Remove Stress
  • Perform action as normal

It's a very nice trick and often catches people off-guard, especially now the TIE/sk has speed 2 blue banks, which are pretty fast when chained with the aileron move.

The downside? You have to roll one, single, unmodified attack die and not roll a critical . This is not hard, and it's a sensible tactic to use whenever it's advantageous to do so.

The fact that in the last 1st edition tournament I went to what actually happened was Major Explosion/Direct Hit shouldn't put me off it, but I have to keep consciously reminding myself of that.

That example perfectly illustrates the point. Thank you!

Posted at

@NaKoaLani posted a writeup on Centers of Gravity - what they are, how you can potentially identify them, and how he approaches Imperial list building with them in mind.

https://xwingdebrief.wordpress.com/2019/06/22/centers-of-gravity/

Up Next: DROID's Hyperspace Trial adventures in Colorado! #resourcesmatter

Edited by dsul413
Posted at

In true Military Management Fashion, if in doubt, try putting elements in your opponent's list into a four-box model*:

In this case, your two questions are "How Hard Is It To Kill?" and "How Much Damage Is It Going To Do If I Ignore It?"

How Hard Is It To Kill?

Needs your entire squad _____________ Engage if you get the chance but don't actively manoeuvre to engage ___________________________ KILL MIRANDA DONI FIRST**

Can kill at any point ________________ Actively Ignore in favour of other targets ____________________________________ Deliberately manoeuvre to engage early on

___________________________________________ Limited _________________________________________________ Lots __________

How Much Damage Is It Going To Do If I Ignore It?

* The original, if you're interested, was a German Werhmacht officer's way of ( privately !) categorising his senior officers:

Energetic____________Important Front-Line Command_____________________Do Not Trust With ANYTHING IMPORTANT

Lazy_________________Strategic Staff Position______________________Boring, Routine, But Vital Logistics Duties

_________________________Clever_______________________________________________________Stupid

** Ahem. Maybe some old 1st edition reflexes triggering there.... Sorry.

Edited by Magnus Grendel
Posted at

Article 8 is up - our first fully written debrief. Expect for future debriefs to have up through the second or so round of engagement in snapshots at the bottom of the post to make it easier to follow, and only setup or especially pertinent snapshots in the meat of the writing. We do have the Vassal log linked though, if you have any questions on how the game went!

https://xwingdebrief.wordpress.com/2019/07/04/debrief-1-nakoalani-v-droid-rac-rex-vs-grievous-swarm/

Posted at
9 minutes ago, dsul413 said:

Article 8 is up - our first fully written debrief. Expect for future debriefs to have up through the second or so round of engagement in snapshots at the bottom of the post to make it easier to follow, and only setup or especially pertinent snapshots in the meat of the writing. We do have the Vassal log linked though, if you have any questions on how the game went!

https://xwingdebrief.wordpress.com/2019/07/04/debrief-1-nakoalani-v-droid-rac-rex-vs-grievous-swarm/

Ouch, ya got pasted. :( Nice write up. :) !

Posted at
7 minutes ago, Hiemfire said:

Ouch, ya got pasted. :( Nice write up. :) !

Yeeeeup. Learning definitely occurred.

Posted at

An interesting read, good to see both sides.

Having played both with and against RAC plus 1 quite a bit, your biggest decision is to assess whether your own forces can drop RAC quickly enough that his partner doesn't do too much damage.

His ideal outcome is for Chiraneau to tank your initial attacks and then to run away, possibly before he gives up half points, whilst Rex has a free reign. If you have to chase Chiraneau, he's probably won.

Functionally, the ESC missiles can do a max of 2 damage to Chiraneau, so only firing them at Rex and choosing to ignore the decimator can be the correct choice.

From his point of view, bumping into one or more of your droids to minimise incoming damage makes sense, since Dauntless allows his action. Taking the damage from Vader, in order to shoot your ESC at Rex can be the correct choice too.

Finally, I would reconsider your deployment: what was the purpose of putting Grevious by himself at the right hand side?

Since all of his forces deploy after yours, the logical place for him is to face the weaker flank and try to eliminate Grevious first; you countered that by running, but that left Grevious out of the action for 2 turns at least. If he'd been placed with the vultures, he could have flanked up your left or joined the firing line to ensure better arc coverage.

Posted at
On 7/7/2019 at 5:59 AM, Gilarius said:

Finally, I would reconsider your deployment: what was the purpose of putting Grevious by himself at the right hand side?

Since all of his forces deploy after yours, the logical place for him is to face the weaker flank and try to eliminate Grevious first; you countered that by running, but that left Grevious out of the action for 2 turns at least. If he'd been placed with the vultures, he could have flanked up your left or joined the firing line to ensure better arc coverage.

Grievous was positioned how I typically played Wat, in a Maul/Wat/ESC Vulture list. It was more instinct than anything, with the goal of getting RAC and/or Rexlar to over commit to him and eat the swarm's salvo. I would bring him closer if I play this type of game again, for sure. He's actually one of the first two to shoot at Rexlar, but that's because of how I misplayed the opening engagement and is not indicative of an appropriate opening.

TLDR - I agree! Thanks!

Posted at

What about running targeting sync with missiles on the zeta survivors?

something along these lines:

(32) Zeta Squadron Survivor [TIE/sf Fighter]
(5) Homing Missiles
Points: 37

(32) Zeta Squadron Survivor [TIE/sf Fighter]
(5) Homing Missiles
Points: 37

(32) Zeta Squadron Survivor [TIE/sf Fighter]
(5) Homing Missiles
Points: 37

(28) Lieutenant Rivas [TIE/fo Fighter]
(6) Targeting Synchronizer
Points: 34

(45) "Quickdraw" [TIE/sf Fighter]
(2) Fanatical
(2) Fire-Control System
(6) Targeting Synchronizer
Points: 55

Total points: 200.

Posted at
1 hour ago, battlestarbill said:

What about running targeting sync with missiles on the zeta survivors?

something along these lines:

(32) Zeta Squadron Survivor [TIE/sf Fighter]
(5) Homing Missiles
Points: 37

(32) Zeta Squadron Survivor [TIE/sf Fighter]
(5) Homing Missiles
Points: 37

(32) Zeta Squadron Survivor [TIE/sf Fighter]
(5) Homing Missiles
Points: 37

(28) Lieutenant Rivas [TIE/fo Fighter]
(6) Targeting Synchronizer
Points: 34

(45) "Quickdraw" [TIE/sf Fighter]
(2) Fanatical
(2) Fire-Control System
(6) Targeting Synchronizer
Points: 55

Total points: 200.

I always really hate to see Quickdraw without Special Forces Gunner to give a 3rd attack die to their bonus attacks. Meanwhile, Targeting Synchronizer really feels like the long way around compared to Passive Sensors.

Posted at

Fair enough. The other rendition of this had midnight with fanatical and targeting sync in place of QuickDraw.

Posted at
15 hours ago, theBitterFig said:

I always really hate to see Quickdraw without Special Forces Gunner to give a 3rd attack die to their bonus attacks. Meanwhile, Targeting Synchronizer really feels like the long way around compared to Passive Sensors.

I concur regarding SFG, the three dice gun really makes QD a threat in many lists.

13 hours ago, battlestarbill said:

Fair enough. The other rendition of this had midnight with fanatical and targeting sync in place of QuickDraw.

I haven't had a whole lot of luck with Midnight in 2.0, but I'd like to get her on the table a little more often to give her a fair shake. I imagine the inability to modify opponent's dice at all makes her significantly less useful than the 1.0 Juke/Comm Relay shenanigans. For Targeting Synchronizer, I haven't even really looked at the card so maybe - since they have access to the sensor slot, I would probably lean toward passive sensors in most lists but it is feasible.

Edited by dsul413
Posted at
On 7/20/2019 at 10:05 AM, dsul413 said:

New blog post, different direction than some of the previous posts. This time its a breakdown of the TIE/SF! Real world combat aircraft comparisons, canon capabilities, and X-Wing applications!

https://xwingdebrief.wordpress.com/2019/07/19/the-hangar-1-tie-sf-space-superiority-fighter/

Nice article. I ran the Quickdraw and 2 Silencers list back in X-Wing 1.0 and did really well with it. I got my best tournament finish with this list, a top 4 finish at the Mandalore Open at KublaCon last year. Now I'm running the 5 Zetas with Homing Missiles & Passive Sensors. I've only played one game so far, tabling an Anakin D-7b, Ric N-1 and Wolffe ARC for the loss of 2 TIE/SF. One thing I found out is you do not want to joust this list.

Edited by T70 Driver
Posted at
2 hours ago, T70 Driver said:

Nice article. I ran the Quickdraw and 2 Silencers list back in X-Wing 1.0 and did really well with it. I got my best tournament finish with this list, a top 4 finish at the Mandalore Open at KublaCon last year. Now I'm running the 5 Zetas with Homing Missiles & Passive Sensors. I've only played one game so far, tabling an Anakin D-7b, Ric N-1 and Wolffe ARC for the loss of 2 TIE/SF. One thing I found out is you do not wan to joust this list.

Thanks! I'd be interested in hearing how future games go with the 5 Zetas. I haven't been able to run it but I've seen it run, seems very interesting! I flew Vader and 2 Silencers in 1.0 and very much enjoyed it, and I've dabbled a bit with the QD + 2 FOTP list in 2.0.

Posted at

Excellent blog.

Was getting depressed because it seems that all the x wing blogs I used to read are dead. This was a great read!

Posted at

Nice article.

Quote

In other canon sources we also see the SF used to find and fix specific targets (Rivas in the

Captain Phasma comics) and a variety of other long-range missions (many of which were Resistance agents returning with information).

They also get used in the Poe Dameron comics as the security force accompanying Terex' drop force; the First Order sent a cruiser with loads of 'generic' TIE/fo aboard, but the initial force to go down was TIE/sf, as you got the maximum capability for the smallest number of platforms (since this was during the 'cold war' and in theory the Resistance and First Order were both forbidden from shooting at one another)

Quote

The two die primary attacks make sense in the context of the TIE/FO laser cannons, with an added bit of “they’re harder to use without the gunner” fluff for the turret. The missile slot obviously makes sense, and aligning it with the turret is a fun application, especially lately as costs have been reduced. Improved shields with reduced agility over the TIE/FO all makes sense.

With two die primaries, 6 hit points, 2 agility, and missiles, it's a pretty close match to a TIE/sa or TIE/ag when used as a missile platform. Yes, it costs more, but it's pretty easy to see the advantages; three hits become shields, a much better dial, access to the evade action and the systems and tech slots, as well as the ability to fire missiles backwards. You get what you pay for.

Quote

The dial also makes a lot of sense, and has some great applications given the design space. Interestingly, it IS a faster dial than the T-70, so Poe’s reaction makes some sense – the straight line speed gets up to 5 straight, while the T-70 (not counting its boost) goes to 4 straight. The lack of white 1 hards/blue hards does make maneuvering a little more difficult, especially after utilizing the sloops, but the full complement of slow speed basic maneuvers provides an additional benefit, time on target.

Especially with the Resistance Era's party piece of the Tech Slot. Adding a Pattern Analyser is great for any TIE/sf which really cares which way it's pointing, as it....doesn't quite make those manoeuvres white, but it's close.

Don't underestimate the option for Passive Sensors with a 5-point missile. Homing Missiles provide a nice ace-hunting punch whilst clusters let you engage at range 2 with 3-dice attacks for 4 turns. Comparison with Fanatical/Advanced Optics Omegas is a difficult choice - the latter is better at range 1, higher initiative, and - since you can burn that focus defensively - much tougher, especially at 3. On the other hand, passive sensors/homing missiles from 5 ships makes range 3 a no-win zone for enemy ships, so that's not exactly a problem.

Massed Ion Missiles are probably quite scary too; just because being predictable in front of a fast swarm is a scary place to be.

I'm rather tempted to try just 6 generic Zeta TIE/sf, too. 6 ships is, I think, the minimum for a 'purely' 2-dice attack squad to work without a second string (advanced optics and the /sf's ability to concentrate fire probably qualifies) but don't underestimate how much killing they can take.

Edited by Magnus Grendel
Posted at
14 minutes ago, Magnus Grendel said:

Nice article.

They also get used in the Poe Dameron comics as the security force accompanying Terex' drop force; the First Order sent a cruiser with loads of 'generic' TIE/fo aboard, but the initial force to go down was TIE/sf, as you got the maximum capability for the smallest number of platforms (since this was during the 'cold war' and in theory the Resistance and First Order were both forbidden from shooting at one another)

With two die primaries, 6 hit points, 2 agility, and missiles, it's a pretty close match to a TIE/sa or TIE/ag when used as a missile platform. Yes, it costs more, but it's pretty easy to see the advantages; three hits become shields, a much better dial, access to the evade action and the systems and tech slots, as well as the ability to fire missiles backwards. You get what you pay for.

Especially with the Resistance Era's party piece of the Tech Slot. Adding a Pattern Analyser is great for any TIE/sf which really cares which way it's pointing, as it....doesn't quite make those manoeuvres white, but it's close.

Don't underestimate the option for Passive Sensors with a 5-point missile. Homing Missiles provide a nice ace-hunting punch whilst clusters let you engage at range 2 with 3-dice attacks for 4 turns. Comparison with Fanatical/Advanced Optics Omegas is a difficult choice - the latter is better at range 1, higher initiative, and - since you can burn that focus defensively - much tougher, especially at 3. On the other hand, passive sensors/homing missiles from 5 ships makes range 3 a no-win zone for enemy ships, so that's not exactly a problem.

Massed Ion Missiles are probably quite scary too; just because being predictable in front of a fast swarm is a scary place to be.

I'm rather tempted to try just 6 generic Zeta TIE/sf, too. 6 ships is, I think, the minimum for a 'purely' 2-dice attack squad to work without a second string (advanced optics and the /sf's ability to concentrate fire probably qualifies) but don't underestimate how much killing they can take.

Thanks! Agreed, they're a better missile platform than they're given credit for, and they're far more flexible than the bomber or aggressor. PA is a really fun upgrade on these guys. I need to get the 5 with missiles on the board, I've seen it do well but haven't had the time to mess with it yet.

6x zeta is an interesting squad. With the flexible arcs you can really create fun and interesting modified attack kill boxes, and those 2 dice attacks turn into 3 dice really quickly in a furball. 36 health against 2 agility is a lot to chew through.

Posted at
14 minutes ago, Magnus Grendel said:

With two die primaries, 6 hit points, 2 agility, and missiles, it's a pretty close match to a TIE/sa or TIE/ag when used as a missile platform. Yes, it costs more, but it's pretty easy to see the advantages; three hits become shields, a much better dial, access to the evade action and the systems and tech slots, as well as the ability to fire missiles backwards. You get what you pay for.

So very true.

Relatedly, the TIE/sf kind of makes me want to give the TIE/ag a bit more of a try, but only with one specific build: with Dorsal Turret and no other upgrades. Losing a health is bad, but you'll be able to arc off to the side. I think it'd be interesting.

16 minutes ago, Magnus Grendel said:

I'm rather tempted to try just 6 generic Zeta TIE/sf, too. 6 ships is, I think, the minimum for a 'purely' 2-dice attack squad to work without a second string (advanced optics and the /sf's ability to concentrate fire probably qualifies) but don't underestimate how much killing they can take.

There's just such a huge blocking and killzoning potential. Block with the front ones, killzone with the back. Front ones fly past with actions, rear ones block.

I think something to learn with TIE/sf is when to actually just bite the bullet and S-Loop. To be sure, you fly past someone on white moves to get actions--leveraging rear guns pretty much the entire reason to even fly an SF--but after that? It's tempting to keep drifting on the 1-straight and 1-bank for a while, but doing the flip to get better position sooner might make sense.

Posted at
1 hour ago, theBitterFig said:

It's tempting to keep drifting on the 1-straight and 1-bank for a while, but doing the flip to get better position sooner might make sense.

Especially since you need a fair amount of space to do a speed 3 segnor.

As ever, it depends on the situation, but I agree; you're going to need to turn around eventually, and if your various ships keep heading off in different directions firing their rear guns, you risk splitting up your forces - something a squad with 2-dice primaries cannot afford, since range 3 shots without ordnance are a joke.