1 hour ago, Micanthropyre said:

So I think that your assessment of the viability of large and medium base ships is a little off (Jendon Taps, Hatchetman, Double Deci, Obi and 3 ARCs, Quad U-Wings, Ketsu, Upsilons, and Dooku have all seen success post points and pre Sun Fac).

As far as lower initiative and filler, Sear Swarm, Torkil Seevor 3K, TIE Swarm, 5SF, Dooku and 6, Jendon Inquisitors, Black Suns, Barrage Bombers, and 5 RZ-2s all have seen success.

If you want to talk about their attractiveness to the average player, and you want to see more of the larger ships on the table because you want to change player preferences through the vehicle of Sun Fac as a catalyst for that change, well thats the question. Is this what you really want to see? From your post it sounds like you don't believe that those things are viable... but the tournament results show differently.

I think thats where a lot of the miscommunication is coming from: you are saying one thing (large and medium bases aren't good) and people are roundly rejecting that statement for the same reasons I pointed out above. And then instead of making that the debate, what is getting injected is what I'm asking: do you want to force people to play other things by making the things they like not good?

I'm cutting this off right here.

Because that's a trap. If I answer yes or no, you're able to funnel me into an accusation that I cannot escape. So I will provide no answer, because a question like that does not debate seek, but shutting down an argument entirely.

And that ain't my meta.

4 minutes ago, Captain Lackwit said:

I'm cutting this off right here.

Because that's a trap. If I answer yes or no, you're able to funnel me into an accusation that I cannot escape. So I will provide no answer, because a question like that does not debate seek, but shutting down an argument entirely.

And that ain't my meta.

Yeah, that answers it plenty.

Just now, Micanthropyre said:

Yeah, that answers it plenty.

No, it does not. But you have confirmed my suspicion of attempting to funnel me into a preconceived notion. You don't know what my answer is, nor will I give it to you, because proving, or disproving you, benefits me in no way.

Just know your tactic was called out, and that you need to polish your debating craft a little more.

1 minute ago, Captain Lackwit said:

No, it does not. But you have confirmed my suspicion of attempting to funnel me into a preconceived notion. You don't know what my answer is, nor will I give it to you, because proving, or disproving you, benefits me in no way.

Just know your tactic was called out, and that you need to polish your debating craft a little more.

Thats a cute way to make it personal.

I was expecting you to say no and offer more of an explanation as to what you were attempting to do. But you don't have an answer that doesn't make you look like a jerk, and that answers the question plenty.

11 minutes ago, Micanthropyre said:

Thats a cute way to make it personal.

I was expecting you to say no and offer more of an explanation as to what you were attempting to do. But you don't have an answer that doesn't make you look like a jerk, and that answers the question plenty.

I continue to abstain to give you an answer that is certain. I will not appease your inquiry. This isn't being a jerk.

This is being smart.

So, post worlds, what's the verdict?

Ensnare is still a mistake, but it's maybe less abusive than expected? Triple Imp Aces won worlds so they clearly weren't entirely invalidated by Ensnare Fac.

I would still prefer an errata to a cost change (to improve gameplay and keep Fac/Chertek viable), but would a significant cost increase make Ensnare less of an NPE due to the lower ship count it would necessitate? I definitely don't buy the argument that 2 ensnare Nantexes could solo most lists without incredible skill.

For the record, I'd like to see errata on three cards:

• Ensnare

• Inertial Dampeners

• Punishing One Title (and/or the Jumpmaster's ship cards)

Errata should happen not because a card is unbalanced, but because a card is un fun. Points fix balance, full stop. Erratas make cards actually play differently, and in a case where the card's fundamental function runs contrary to how it ought to play, I think that's a good case for an errata. All three of these cards are really incapable of being played enjoyably because they will either be mostly useless, way too strong, or possibly switch between both depending on cost and matchup. Specifically:

• Ensnare is way too strong at I6 even at any cost; I would say it's more potent than Supernatural Reflexes and less fun than Supernatural Reflexes. Maybe it's just me but Supernatural Anakin is way more fun to play against than Ensnare Sun Fac.

• Inertial Dampeners only works with high-I and shield regen. If it were a simple 1-2 charges it would be flexible and fun for a variety of ships. Burning shields just makes it plain stupid one way or the other, no matter the cost.

• You can make it so cheap that the Jumps will always take it, but autoinclude cards are no fun. You can make the jumps really cheap, but high-health with low damage output is also kind of un-fun. Either give the Jump eithera white rotate or double-turret arc (that it always should have had) or make the title add a 3 front primary (or just straight up increase the single turret arc to a 3). Either way the Jump becomes much more affordable without being so cheap that it's only useful as a blocker/damage sponge/time buyer. For fun, make more Jump titles. One to add reload and sensor slot perhaps. One to take strain instead of stress.

In general, I think that the devs stray into error when they try to rebalance the meta by introducing new content. Costs should be able to balance the meta if they're really working properly. If they're relying on PS to make low-I missiles viable (when they should really just be cheaper) or on ensnare to make large ships viable (when they should really just be cheaper), they're taking the problem the wrong way around and rather reducing than increasing the viable options to be taken. These new pieces that become great upgrades to take are usually that way because they're underpriced and making up for something else that's overpriced. Instead of correcting the prices, they're baking in superpowered synergies. New content is great for adding diversity to the game, but it's bad for improving diversity in existing pieces.

I'd also prefer that pinpoint be FULLY execute, in keeping with the game's spirit

Till then, seems all you need is some bug spray!

(Also maybe time to get used to this little buzzing weirdo. People might just not have had enough practice with it)

5 minutes ago, ficklegreendice said:

I'd also prefer that pinpoint be FULLY execute, in keeping with the game's spirit

Till then, seems all you need is some bug spray!

(Also maybe time to get used to this little buzzing weirdo. People might just not have had enough practice with it)

I will say that the devs specifically wanted it not to require full execution. It’s a fluff decision based on the idea that these things really want to be up close. Thematically, ships nearly in contact are exactly where a tractor array would want them.

Of course, that makes gameplay ... weird. But “unblockable” aces still exist in the sense of AS and Precog, with very similar limitations (no mods), so I don’t think it’s that abusive.

The problem is really just ensnare.

1 hour ago, ClassicalMoser said:

So, post worlds, what's the verdict?

Ensnare is still a mistake, but it's maybe less abusive than expected? Triple Imp Aces won worlds so they clearly weren't entirely invalidated by Ensnare Fac.

Still unfun to play against, and if you bring trip aces to a tournament, pray you dodge him in the matchups.

He's not unfun to play against if you bring a medium base ship, or two, or if you plan your engagement.

Like Guri/Soontir isn't unfun to play against if you outbid them, or ID Han wasn't unfun to play against if you have more than 3 Arcs.

Ships all have counter play, just that Sun Fac landed in the middle of a 3 small base ship meta and the knee jerk was disproportionate because he was directly impacting the 'fun' of people playing the lists he prayed on ... if we'd been in the middle of a swarm, or large/medium base ship meta, he wouldn't have even made a ripple.

Yep if you play a swarm you don't need to worry about Sun Fec... he will reposition what? one ship and if you fly without any mistakes the rest of the swarm will blast him to pices

29 minutes ago, Dreadai said:

He's not unfun to play against if you plan your engagement.

This. He's expensive and squishy, you can force a bad trade. I can understand people not enjoying the risk and complexity of arranging that, but it doesn't make it categorically rotten for everyone, to the point where it needs removing from the game.

For me, it goes in the file with things that will end a game in the 1st few turns if you make a single mistake. There is a lot of that already, including many things that are considered to be overwhelmingly wholesome. It's not a game condition that I particularly enjoy, but at least it's over quickly when it doesn't go your way....

I'm of the opinion that triple aces have some of the better tools for forcing that bad trade. Its just nobody particularly likes trading one of their special, expensive aces. Against Sun, you just have to accept it.

18 minutes ago, Cuz05 said:

I'm of the opinion that triple aces have some of the better tools for forcing that bad trade. Its just nobody particularly likes trading one of their special, expensive aces. Against Sun, you just have to accept it.

I'd agree.

He is, unarguably, an ace himself - and an expensive one, at the wrong side of 75 points with Ensnare and nothing else. Trading Soontir Fel for him is a win - heck, you can trade Fire Control/Hate/Afterburners Vader for him, and still come out ahead.

4 hours ago, Green Squadron 3 said:

Yep if you play a swarm you don't need to worry about Sun Fec... he will reposition what? one ship and if you fly without any mistakes the rest of the swarm will blast him to pices

Sun Fac doesn't exist in a vacuum. If you turn your list towards him, he can bug out as easily as any other ace while either a swarm of vultures or grievous and chertek mop up your swarm. I'm not saying you can't win, but a swarm has just as much trouble with fac as aces do.

25 minutes ago, hargleblarg said:

Sun Fac doesn't exist in a vacuum. If you turn your list towards him, he can bug out as easily as any other ace while either a swarm of vultures or grievous and chertek mop up your swarm. I'm not saying you can't win, but a swarm has just as much trouble with fac as aces do.

Actually he kind of can't. He can 5-straight, or 3- or 1-turn. Usually only one of those actually works and that makes him quite predictable. If he does a reposition he's tractored and that's a big problem for him if he's running away (and outside the R1 for Ensnare). He can't bank boost. He can't double-reposition. These are actually quite significant limitations. I love the design of the Nantex, it's just Ensnare that's so annoying. Maybe just a 20% increase would be enough?

6 minutes ago, ClassicalMoser said:

If he does a reposition he's tractored and that's a big problem for him if he's running away (and outside the R1 for Ensnare). He can't bank boost. He can't double-reposition. These are actually quite significant limitations.

I'd agree. If he's pressing in for a knife fight, he's great, but his ability to fight, or, for that matter, avoid fighting at long range is less impressive than you think.

Compared to what I always think is the 'gold standard' for repositioning (afterburners Duchess) he's surprisingly predictable.

This thread is still going?

22 minutes ago, feltipern1 said:

This thread is still going?

it's strangely wholesome, though

If Ensnare is deemed a problem by the devs. And if they decide a change needs to be made. One route that could be taken without errata would be change the rules reference for tractor tokens (again).

Small and Medium Bases

• 1 tractor token = lower agility by 1
• 2 tractor tokens = tractored (for abilities and reposition)

Large Bases

• 2 tractor tokens = lower agility by 1
• 3 tractor tokens = tractored (for abilities and reposition)

A little clunkier than current but would keep the cards doing what they say they do.

6 hours ago, Green Squadron 3 said:

Yep if you play a swarm you don't need to worry about Sun Fec... he will reposition what? one ship and if you fly without any mistakes the rest of the swarm will blast him to pices

Tell that to the sinker swarm player that was annihilated in LCQ by Sun, Chertek, Greivous. GSP should have the video uploaded shortly.

Once Sun is engaged, its hard to stop him. Any turn or bank can be caught and tractored.

I flew Chertek and had no problems engaging a sinker swarm, and a vulture swarm, or that torkhil, seevor, x3 khiraxz list. Assuming a nantex player is just gonna joust you, or engage before your lower init ships commit to a direction is foolish.

As it would most things, "random first player" would do a fair amount to ameliorate Nantex+Ensnare.

Personally, I still haven't beaten Sun Fac+Ensnare. I did beat Chertek+Ensnare in our last HST, but I did so by simply scattering every time Chertek was in a position to threaten. I won 40-0, and the game wasn't fun for either of us.

It's just not pleasant to play against. Win or lose.

I reckon I must be playing Ensnare (on whatever pilot) wrong, then. None of my opponents have complained.

What I seem to be hearing is that regardless on how it is delivered, most folk HATE the tractor mechanic.

Tractor mechanic, per se , isn't the problem. Unavoidable tractor mechanic is pretty bad. Unavoidable tractor mechanic on multiple ships is horrible.

36 minutes ago, Kleeg005 said:

I reckon I must be playing Ensnare (on whatever pilot) wrong, then. None of my opponents have complained.

19 hours ago, Dreadai said:

He's not unfun to play against if you bring a medium base ship, or two, or if you plan your engagement.

This implies that "unfun" simply means, "I can't beat him," which isn't the case.