Here's to Holdo getting the Cikatro Vizago treatment... It's probably going to happen when S&V actually gets a ******* ship that can use Coaxium, or an upgrade that enables it to be taken... A.k.a. likely never. 🤮 😠

On 6/6/2020 at 6:35 PM, Hiemfire said:

Here's to Holdo getting the Cikatro Vizago treatment... It's probably going to happen when S&V actually gets a ******* ship that can use Coaxium, or an upgrade that enables it to be taken... A.k.a. likely never. 🤮 😠

What treatment do you mean? I get the parallel -- being able to switch things from ship to ship, even to a ship that can't normally have something -- but beyond that, I don't understand.

11 minutes ago, Jeff Wilder said:

What treatment do you mean? I get the parallel -- being able to switch things from ship to ship, even to a ship that can't normally have something -- but beyond that, I don't understand.

Highlighted can't happen anymore using Cik (was killed in the v105 RR update back in Sept 2019), that is the Cikatro Vizago treatment. Cik used to be able to do effectively the same thing as Holdo regardless of squad building limitations and ship size, but it took a fair bit more setup and more of an investment points wise to make it a perpetual effect. He was re-FAQ'd to be fully limited by the Squad building limitations and the restrictions on the upgrade cards (he originally ignored them). Holdo completely ignores the restrictions and bypasses the old requirement of having the upgrade equipped to the ship to gain a token from the upgrade. You can actually cloak GR-75's using Holdo's ability, it just can't reposition if it spends the token though just moving the token away would be a better idea since it keeps the token in play (Cik got the final nail in his coffin as a reaction to them being asked about Cloaked Huge ships, I'm kicking myself for asking that question even though it needed to be asked). Holdo + Cloak Device + Colossus Mech = 38 points for 2, ship hopping (never have to be spent) cloak tokens. For Cik every ship that was going to be effected had to have an equipped Illicit to transfer which at the time was CD (was 5 points at the time) and multiple copies of either Inertial Dampeners (was 1 point at first, then became init costed thanks to Handbrake Han before the final, currently, nerf to Cik), Contraband Cybernetics (back when it was 6 points) or a rigged Cargo Chute (4 points). Jabba (6 points at the time of the nerf) was also a near hard req for the combo

They neutered Cik for being able to do what Holdo does better and more efficiently than he ever did.

Hopefully people will start Ion walking aces of the board with cloaked Cobalts. That might get FFG's attention.

Example list, 34 points left over for whatever else or upgrading the Colossus Mech

Colossus Station Mechanic (26)
Cloaking Device (4)

Cobalt Squadron Bomber (52)
Trajectory Simulator (6)
Amilyn Holdo (8)
Ion Bombs (6)

Cobalt Squadron Bomber (52)
Trajectory Simulator (6)
Ion Bombs (6)
Total: 166

View in Yet Another Squad Builder 2.0

@Jeff Wilder , again, nicely done podcast.

The bar is continuing to rise. Keep it up guys!

...this tea is for you! Wait, hold that thought. We'll wait till evening and make it a pint. Far more fitting.

On 6/8/2020 at 10:42 AM, Hiemfire said:

Hopefully people will start Ion walking aces of the board with cloaked Cobalts. That might get FFG's attention.

OMG, that's hilarious. And terrifying. Terrilarious! Hilarifying!

On 6/8/2020 at 12:57 PM, clanofwolves said:

...this tea is for you! Wait, hold that thought. We'll wait till evening and make it a pint. Far more fitting.

We really appreciate it. Like, really, really. Any kind of segment y'all would like to us do? Anything in particular you'd like to hear us argue^H^H^H^H^Htalk about?

Mmmm, pint.

16 hours ago, Jeff Wilder said:

We really appreciate it. Like, really, really. Any kind of segment y'all would like to us do? Anything in particular you'd like to hear us argue^H^H^H^H^Htalk about?

Mmmm, pint.

You guys are on such a roll, I wouldn't want to deter your path, simply keep talking about what you enjoy (and what you don't) and it'll work out great. I'll just be the guy who buys a round from time to time.

Pew, pew...

This is relevant to our most recent recording, not yet released.

Ouch. Pava got robbed. Or did she? @Jeff Wilder Um the straight edge isn't aligned with her firing arc lines. You can see it diverging in the upper right of her base. The aft arc line is visible through the straight edge, it shouldn't be if it was lined up correctly instead of aft corner to arc line as your image shows.

1 minute ago, Hiemfire said:

Ouch. Pava got robbed.

It has been very frustrating. Apparently VASSAL arcs (at least on Small ships) cannot actually be judged by what's shown on the token. I'd thought arcs had been worked out to be accurate quite a while back, but I was obviously wrong.

In this case, from the X-Wing Vassal Tournament, I'd actually made the decision to take damage, instead of spending Jessica's token, based on my judgment that she had Vonreg in arc for a fully modded shot (and him with no tokens). When Jess' turn came up, I recorded the objection and notified the VASSAL Discord, and we moved on to the end of the round, where Jessica was killed because of the earlier damage I had taken.

It has been funny reading people trying to explain that the arc is "akshully correct," admittedly.

Just now, Jeff Wilder said:

It has been very frustrating. Apparently VASSAL arcs (at least on Small ships) cannot actually be judged by what's shown on the token. I'd thought arcs had been worked out to be accurate quite a while back, but I was obviously wrong.

In this case, from the X-Wing Vassal Tournament, I'd actually made the decision to take damage, instead of spending Jessica's token, based on my judgment that she had Vonreg in arc for a fully modded shot (and him with no tokens). When Jess' turn came up, I recorded the objection and notified the VASSAL Discord, and we moved on to the end of the round, where Jessica was killed because of the earlier damage I had taken.

It has been funny reading people trying to explain that the arc is "akshully correct," admittedly.

I edited my post. The straight edge isn't lined up with the arc lines. You can see the aft left (relative to Pava's nose) arc line through the edge.

9 minutes ago, Hiemfire said:

I edited my post. The straight edge isn't lined up with the arc lines. You can see the aft left (relative to Pava's nose) arc line through the edge.

Feel free to check for yourself. The original image, without the ruler, is in the post. The ruler is available in the Win10 utility app Snip and Sketch, which also has zoom so you can align it quite easily.

You're going to find it's quite clear that Vonreg is in arc by the arc-lines, but out of arc to VASSAL's unmatching coded arc.

I just checked again, and it's just unmistakable. It's not a small inaccuracy.

Here's another image, and in this one I deliberately cheated in favor of VASSAL's inaccuracy.

2 minutes ago, Jeff Wilder said:

Feel free to check for yourself. The original image, without the ruler, is in the post. The ruler is available in the Win10 utility app Snip and Sketch, which also has zoom so you can align it quite easily.

You're going to find it's quite clear that Vonreg is in arc but the arc-lines, but out of arc to VASSAL's unmatching coded arc.

I just checked again, and it's just unmistakable. It's not a small inaccuracy.

2 things going on. The ruler doesn't align with the arc indicators in your first image, and the game's firing arc projection is off. I did double check with aligning a straightedge through the aft and fore arcs. There is an offset to the projected arc. (Pava just barely catches the aft left corner of Vonreg's base, though by a smaller margin than your image indicated.)

4 minutes ago, Hiemfire said:

2 things going on. The ruler doesn't align with the arc indicators in your first image, and the game's firing arc projection is off. I did double check with aligning a straightedge through the aft and fore arcs. There is an offset to the projected arc. (Pava just barely catches the aft left corner of Vonreg's base, though by a smaller margin than your image indicated.)

Yes, they don't match. The arc, as should be drawn out from the arc-lines, is bent.

I don't have investment in which should change -- the base, or the coded arc -- but I feel very strongly that they should match . One of VASSAL's big advantages is its precision ... I thought. Either one can change without having any real deleterious effect on the game.

2 minutes ago, Jeff Wilder said:

Yes, they don't match. The arc, as should be drawn out from the arc-lines, is bent.

I don't have investment in which should change -- the base, or the coded arc -- but I feel very strongly that they should match . One of VASSAL's big advantages is its precision ... I thought. Either one can change without having any real deleterious effect on the game.

Hopefully it gets fixed.

5 minutes ago, Hiemfire said:

Hopefully it gets fixed.

Yeah. I'm feeling cynical, so I doubt it. So far all I've encountered is extreme reluctance to even admit the discrepancy. (To be clear, I don't mean by mu0n or anybody official. No response from them that I've seen.)

There's clearly a discrepancy there and it sucks when the screen does not show what the program wants to depict.
Three reasons why I'm personally not bothered too much by the discrepacy:

1. Vassal has to show the same for both computers. To my understanding it can happen that the shown image is not precisely where the object is. That is why the autoranges are more important. So while it might be clearly in on your side, it could have been out on your opponent's screen. It sucks, but it isn't perfect and sometimes has to suck for someone.

2. Misjudgements happen all the time on real tables, too. Keeping a token because you're sure you have a shot is very common.

3. Vassal is still the most precise version of X-wing - including on the table. So, I'm willing to cut this fan project some slack when it's already the most precise version of the game we have.

10 hours ago, GreenDragoon said:

There's clearly a discrepancy there and it sucks when the screen does not show what the program wants to depict.
Three reasons why I'm personally not bothered too much by the discrepacy:

1. Vassal has to show the same for both computers. To my understanding it can happen that the shown image is not precisely where the object is. That is why the autoranges are more important. So while it might be clearly in on your side, it could have been out on your opponent's screen. It sucks, but it isn't perfect and sometimes has to suck for someone.

2. Misjudgements happen all the time on real tables, too. Keeping a token because you're sure you have a shot is very common.

3. Vassal is still the most precise version of X-wing - including on the table. So, I'm willing to cut this fan project some slack when it's already the most precise version of the game we have.

(1) My opponents said that it was clearly in arc.

(2) Uh ... I didn't make a misjudgment. I made an accurate judgment. That's the point.

(3) I mean ... I guess? But this needs to be fixed. It doesn't matter to me if the auto-arc is fixed to match the drawn arc, or the drawn arc is fixed to match the auto-arc. But they should match . The visual representation of the arc is there for a reason: for players to make judgments from. It needs to actually match what it implicitly purports to represent.

It really depends on your motivation. If you're upset that it happened that way then I can expand why I think you should look at it from a different perspective. That's what I was going for, but I might have misunderstood.

If it's all about a very sober improvement of the game after you found a potential bug or false approach, then I'm in full agreement.

To me it came across like the former.

Well, it was annoying . I wouldn't say it made me upset ... I'm pretty even-keeled.

I have to admit it's getting significantly more annoying every time someone misstates what happened out of some weird reflex to protect VASSAL ... which I'm not attacking.

I strongly believe that if VASSAL is going to be represented as "precise," then the players on VASSAL need to be able to rely on our visual senses to comport with the coding of VASSAL. If we can't rely on the only thing we're supposed to rely on, pre-measurement, then there's a real problem. (Inasmuch as any problem in a game is a "real" problem, anyway.)

Episode 69 -- nice! -- of Wide World of Wargaming (X-Wing) is available. This episode was recorded on June 13th, 2020.

https://www.podbean.com/media/share/pb-y69rq-dffc6b?utm_campaign=w_share_ep&utm_medium=dlink&utm_source=w_share

In this episode we do some coverage of Space Jam Sydney, noticing especially the relatively poor showing of ace lists, even Imperials, and the high ship-count in the Top 16. To close things out, I recount a problem I ran into in VASSAL, during a tournament game, that was actually quite meaningful to the outcome of the game.

As you listen to this part of the show, please pay close attention to the fact that I'm not attacking VASSAL or mu0n in any way. I've been using VASSAL pretty much from the beginning (I was in the first VASSAL X-Wing tournament ever, in fact), and I've donated several times. VASSAL is my preferred online platform, by an absolute mile. My point is just this: (1) Current "printed" arcs vary from the actual coded arc (Ctrl+F or Ctrl+Shift+F) by a significant amount, and (2) They shouldn't, because otherwise how are players supposed to make judgments based on arc, pre-engagement?

It's been very frustrating listening to people avoid addressing the actual issue in favor of pretending I am not appreciative of VASSAL or mu0n, so please don't do that.

(While I'm at it: MegaSilver, thank you for your even-handedness in this. I know you waited just about as long as you could before making your ruling, and I appreciate it.)

Sloane is one of the most powerful control pieces in the game due to the radius of her effect, blocking an affected ship's ability to perform actions by punishing the destruction of her escorts via the double stress penalty and the Drea/Howlrunner offensive reroll against any stressed target out into what would be considered range 6, if weapons reached that far, regardless of arc. When facing a Sloane swarm you have to target ships outside of her range 3 bubble (which is massive when on a large base, roughly 2 large based R3 radii overlapping when she's equipped on a huge ship) or try and focus fire her carrier down, if you can catch it (Other than the Lambda, the Imperial crew carriers can keep pace with or out run boostless ships that have access to the 5 straight and 3 banks) or don't get blocked into a tokenless attack/defense. She's been a golden egg hidden in the shadows for Imps since 2.0 started.

Nice episode!

Imho Sloane is something which should never have been added to the game in its current form. There is one, and only one, objective in this game. Destroy the opponents ships.

Sloane punishes you hard for trying to play the game and fulfil that one objective. And only highly mobile ships can get around that massive bubble.

Slow ships get erased.

19 hours ago, Hiemfire said:

She's been a golden egg hidden in the shadows for Imps since 2.0 started.

Oh, I tried her early on Echo, and found it pretty NPE for the opponent. Sloane is one of the reasons why the crew slot disappeared from Phantoms (as also named in the episode).

Just now, Managarmr said:

Oh, I tried her early on Echo, and found it pretty NPE for the opponent. Sloane is one of the reasons why the crew slot disappeared from Phantoms (as also named in the episode).

Vader crew was the big one there. Not needing to have his carrier decloak to perform his ability and Token cancellation before Whisper's (his carrier in the list that got phantom's crew slot swapped out for gunner) squad mates and herself engaged was brutal (take a damage now and hold onto your token or lose your token and not have anything to mod your defense roll when Facing Whisper, Soontir and Redline...). Sloane was rarely used iirc since she was mentally pigeon holed by a fairly large part of the player base as a swarm upgrade and there was a fairly nasty aversion to playing any Imp swarm that wasn't the Howlswarm. Some, like you, did play her but for the most part she was a boogieman hiding in the shadows till STOL's article on his match in Europe turned the light on her. That's what I meant by "golden egg hidden in the shadows". She's always been potent, people just preferred to fly the "best list", frankly easiest list to fly would probably be more accurate, of the archetype that she got pigeonholed into.