10 hours ago, Bgartz29 said:

Makes sense. Right now my group is just getting into the game (refugees from Destiny) so we will be playing skirmish games until we get our armies built up. It appears thought that vehicles are not meta, which is expected but unfortunate. I'm still getting me an AAT though

I would definitely keep playing them at primes and above. I won my Worlds spot in November with Droids, and I have results from several events that show Droids or Clones winning it all. It can definitely be done!

https://legiontournamentcircuit.com/tournament-data-2019/

https://legiontournamentcircuit.com/tournament-data-2020/

@syrath
"Given how much there are calls for a Tauntauns nerf when the imps dominate the top 4 lists. I'd say shoretroopers are worse here."

It's the basic programming principle. Your output is a consequence of your input.

i.e. When sniper teams were most popular, most of the top 8 had sniper teams.

Now that Tauntauns are very popular, most Rebel lists that reach the top 8 likely will have Tauntauns.
Same thing for Imperial lists with Shoretroopers.

It doesn't mean they're necessarily extra good in and of themselves, it means they're popular.
You know what a good indicator of something being overpowered is? Having next to no representation...yet all instances perform VERY well. i.e. Only 8 lists have a particular makeup, and 6-8 of those lists reach the top 8.

Having 80% of lists with a particular type, and then 80% of those lists reach the top 8 is just proportional representation. It's literally the expected outcome.

So, to summarize, this is indicative of nothing more than the flavor of the month.

On 1/28/2020 at 6:31 PM, Darth evil said:

it would then render the Mortar practically unplayable, Crit 1 is how this thing actually does any damage.

I would argue that the Comms chaining is a strategic way to play and requires a certain level of knowledge and skill to achieve. The Crit 1 just happens with dumb luck. I’d rather keep the valuable part that requires skill than the valuable part that doesn’t.

A mortar getting a crit through every other round seems fine if it lets you pump up your shores and mitigate order control every round. I don’t see that as unplayable.

54 minutes ago, Derrault said:

@syrath
"Given how much there are calls for a Tauntauns nerf when the imps dominate the top 4 lists. I'd say shoretroopers are worse here."

It's the basic programming principle. Your output is a consequence of your input.

i.e. When sniper teams were most popular, most of the top 8 had sniper teams.

Now that Tauntauns are very popular, most Rebel lists that reach the top 8 likely will have Tauntauns.
Same thing for Imperial lists with Shoretroopers.

It doesn't mean they're necessarily extra good in and of themselves, it means they're popular.
You know what a good indicator of something being overpowered is? Having next to no representation...yet all instances perform VERY well. i.e. Only 8 lists have a particular makeup, and 6-8 of those lists reach the top 8.

Having 80% of lists with a particular type, and then 80% of those lists reach the top 8 is just proportional representation. It's literally the expected outcome.

So, to summarize, this is indicative of nothing more than the flavor of the month.

I actually believe that tauntauns are less powerful than the shore gunline IRL. On TTS, tauntauns seem abnormally strong because of the design of the maps. In real life, terrain is normally more clear cut and there are normally larger firing lanes, which is better for the Shoretroopers. I also believe that we see more shoretrooper gunline lists here because 50% of the total amount of lists were all imperial. It only stands to reason that the top 8 would be unproportionally imperial. I think big takeaways from the tournament are some things I have been saying for a long time. 1. Armor is good 2. Palp is good 3. Anything you WANT to play and get good at playing can win games. 4. The meta is too much of a hivemind, be your own person and have your own thoughts.

I don't think everyone needs their own unique list, but people should be more open to running things that they enjoy instead of trying to conform to "the meta" to attempt to win games. At the end of the day, you had Shoretrooper gunlines go 4/0 and 1/3... Taking a unit doesn't equate to a win. I enjoy Boba Fett, so I don't go to a tournament without him. I do well and it all comes down to having experience playing with him and enjoying the style he brings to my lists.

2 hours ago, Derrault said:

@syrath
"Given how much there are calls for a Tauntauns nerf when the imps dominate the top 4 lists. I'd say shoretroopers are worse here."

It's the basic programming principle. Your output is a consequence of your input.

i.e. When sniper teams were most popular, most of the top 8 had sniper teams.

Now that Tauntauns are very popular, most Rebel lists that reach the top 8 likely will have Tauntauns.
Same thing for Imperial lists with Shoretroopers.

It doesn't mean they're necessarily extra good in and of themselves, it means they're popular.
You know what a good indicator of something being overpowered is? Having next to no representation...yet all instances perform VERY well. i.e. Only 8 lists have a particular makeup, and 6-8 of those lists reach the top 8.

Having 80% of lists with a particular type, and then 80% of those lists reach the top 8 is just proportional representation. It's literally the expected outcome.

So, to summarize, this is indicative of nothing more than the flavor of the month.

While I generally agree that popularity/ease of use does not necessarily mean a unit is overpowered, tauntauns are ridiculously good units. They have a high floor for newbies and a high ceiling for anyone who puts time and strategy into them. They aren’t broken, but I do think they are overpowered.

2 hours ago, Derrault said:

@syrath
"Given how much there are calls for a Tauntauns nerf when the imps dominate the top 4 lists. I'd say shoretroopers are worse here."

It's the basic programming principle. Your output is a consequence of your input.

i.e. When sniper teams were most popular, most of the top 8 had sniper teams.

Now that Tauntauns are very popular, most Rebel lists that reach the top 8 likely will have Tauntauns.
Same thing for Imperial lists with Shoretroopers.

It doesn't mean they're necessarily extra good in and of themselves, it means they're popular.
You know what a good indicator of something being overpowered is? Having next to no representation...yet all instances perform VERY well. i.e. Only 8 lists have a particular makeup, and 6-8 of those lists reach the top 8.

Having 80% of lists with a particular type, and then 80% of those lists reach the top 8 is just proportional representation. It's literally the expected outcome.

So, to summarize, this is indicative of nothing more than the flavor of the month.

Here comes the circular logic trolling...

59 minutes ago, lologrelol said:

Here comes the circular logic trolling...

If you don’t understand the distinction between effective and popular. Well.

3 hours ago, Derrault said:

If you don’t understand the distinction between effective and popular. Well.

Well you are a know troll on these forums.

High representation is not evidence for a unit being "op". Sure.

However there is a reason for this over representation and that is because these units peform really well and after testning lists and playing, most compeditive players picks these units for their tournament lists and they place high.

You can call "nuh uh" all u want, but for most of us, it's pretty easy to see why.

Have a nice meal!

Actually, you only need one argument for all his trolling to crumble.

He opposes popularity and effectiveness. So what happens when a unit is popular and overpowered ? In all your nonsense, there seems to be no room for this reality...

Like actually, all the Empire lists in the top 8 having shoretroopers could be the sign that shoretroopers are popular and powerful, as well as it could be the sign that shoretroopers are popular and overpowered. But it can't be the sign that shoretroopers are popular but meh, otherwise (by the same logical argument that you tried and failed to use) there would at least be an Empire list without them in the top 8.

I would add that 5 lists out of 8 with strike teams is... quite solid ! You suggested they were popular before then gone. Nope they are not !

While I'm not particularly surprised by Leia + Tauns combo being popular, I kinda expected Han + Tauns to also be a thing after having witnessed what it can do. I wonder if nobody bothered to take it or it simply didn't work as well as I thought it might.

On 1/28/2020 at 6:46 PM, TalkPolite said:

https://legiontournamentcircuit.com/tournament-data-2020/

There is no data at this link

EDIT: There is no data at either link

20 hours ago, Derrault said:

@syrath
"Given how much there are calls for a Tauntauns nerf when the imps dominate the top 4 lists. I'd say shoretroopers are worse here."

It's the basic programming principle. Your output is a consequence of your input.

i.e. When sniper teams were most popular, most of the top 8 had sniper teams.

Now that Tauntauns are very popular, most Rebel lists that reach the top 8 likely will have Tauntauns.
Same thing for Imperial lists with Shoretroopers.

It doesn't mean they're necessarily extra good in and of themselves, it means they're popular.
You know what a good indicator of something being overpowered is? Having next to no representation...yet all instances perform VERY well. i.e. Only 8 lists have a particular makeup, and 6-8 of those lists reach the top 8.

Having 80% of lists with a particular type, and then 80% of those lists reach the top 8 is just proportional representation. It's literally the expected outcome.

So, to summarize, this is indicative of nothing more than the flavor of the month.

Not entirely sure on that , but it bears looking at either way. I'm actually on the side that Tauntauns aren't necessarily OP or shoretroopers , but when you look at the rebel lists which were essentially Leia, Sabine Rebel Troopers , snipers, Tauntauns, you could also argue Leia is also the lowest common denominator , since she has dominated Rebel lists since long before Tauntauns, so the same argument could be placed one that single unit. Other commanders don't really match up.

While I generally agree that popularity/ease of use does not necessarily mean a unit is overpowered, tauntauns are ridiculously good units. They have a high floor for newbies and a high ceiling for anyone who puts time and strategy into them. They aren’t broken, but I do think they are overpowered.

Tauntauns are fine, they have reasonably good short range offense and they're fast. On the flip side their defense is abysmal. 2 Dodge tokens only after activating no nimble + white surge dice withers under concentrated firepower.

However there is a reason for this over representation

Yes, the over-representation is due to them being popular.

Why are they popular? Because people bought them, like them, and enjoy how they use them.
Are they using them more or less effectively than say, Strike teams were used in the same tournaments last year?

Well, that is a pure statistics question: Which had a higher ratio of lists entered with the unit to wins? If the ratio is 1:1, you're getting exactly what you expect. If it's below 1:1, then the unit is underperforming, if it's greater than 1:1, it's overperforming (OP? I guess that depends on its ratio vs that of every other unit).

Did you compile those ratios? No? Yeah.

I would add that 5 lists out of 8 with strike teams is... quite solid ! You suggested they were popular before then gone. Nope they are not !

Your sentence sounds like you didn't understand what I was writing then, or now. In the discussion of last years LVO, they again had only the top 8 information recorded, which isn't an indication of if units are under or overperforming.

It's not about the composition of the top 8 alone. What matters is the seed lists that led 'to' the top 8 composition.
If you input 64 lists and only 8 of those had strike teams, and 5 of those 8 made it to the top 8...that would be a "wow, strike teams are amazing!" moment. Ditto tauntauns. Ditto shoretroopers.

Which is not to say that you can't find a unit broadly contributes to success and still doesn't make it into the top 8 simply because it didn't work out for them in that competition.

Here's a reasonable contrast: How many of the top 8 had Palpatine as a commander? How many of the total lists in the tournament had Palpatine? What were the ratio of games won by Palapatine lists?

Answer those three questions, and it'll help inform you as to if Palpatine is good (relative to other commander choices) in and of himself.

22 hours ago, Derrault said:

If you don’t understand the distinction between effective and popular. Well.

I don't think you understand that effective and popular are not mutually exclusive.

2 hours ago, Derrault said:

and enjoy how they use them.

Part of people's enjoyment is winning.

3 hours ago, Derrault said:

Are they using them more or less effectively than say, Strike teams were used in the same tournaments last year?

Strike teams had a nerf, (and rightly so) otherwise they would be more effective. Your comment is ridiculous as usual.

3 hours ago, Derrault said:

Did you compile those ratios? No? Yeah.

I don't have to compile raw data to understand something in an abstracted game of tactics. It's called PLAY TESTING.

3 hours ago, Derrault said:

It's not about the composition of the top 8 alone. What matters is the seed lists that led 'to' the top 8 composition.

If you input 64 lists and only 8 of those had strike teams, and 5 of those 8 made it to the top 8...that would be a "wow, strike teams are amazing!" moment. Ditto tauntauns. Ditto shoretroopers.

Yes it is. IF THERE IS A PATTERN IN THE TOP 8, it is indicative of a common effective factor.

The top lists are all that matters in competitive play, as they show what is most effective.

3 hours ago, Derrault said:

Here's a reasonable contrast: How many of the top 8 had Palpatine as a commander? How many of the total lists in the tournament had Palpatine? What were the ratio of games won by Palapatine lists?

Nice red herring here pal.

Palps is not the issue in this argument. It's the effectiveness of shores and tauns. Stay on topic.

We saw this same argument with the T-47 and AT-ST.

I and other recommended points reductions in these forums.

We got those. Almost to the exact level I asked for.

POINT COSTS MATTER.

25 minutes ago, lologrelol said:

I don't think you understand that effective and popular are not mutually exclusive.

Part of people's enjoyment is winning.

1) I didn’t say they’re mutually exclusive, I said they aren’t the same .

2) The perception of something being good isn’t actually proof it is.

18 minutes ago, lologrelol said:

Strike teams had a nerf, (and rightly so) otherwise they would be more effective. Your comment is ridiculous as usual.

I don't have to compile raw data to understand something in an abstracted game of tactics. It's called PLAY TESTING.

You don’t get a special pass to not have evidence of your claims. Your individual and limited experience has exactly zero bearing on the question of whether a particular unit is performing at expectations, under, or over in tournament settings.

14 minutes ago, lologrelol said:

Yes it is. IF THERE IS A PATTERN IN THE TOP 8, it is indicative of a common effective factor.

The top lists are all that matters in competitive play, as they show what is most effective.

Nice red herring here pal.

Palps is not the issue in this argument. It's the effectiveness of shores and tauns. Stay on topic.

Yeah, no.

You may not have a functional understanding of how seeding impacts probability, but it works like this:

If you put 64 marbles in a jar, and 63 are red; it’s a safe assumption on pulling 8 that they will all be red.

If you change the proportion, the expected draw also changes. Ie if 8/64 are yellow, one of the drawn 8 can be expected to be yellow.

Conversely, if 0/64 are blue, then it’s a certainty that none of those pulled will be blue.

The only way to demonstrably prove the theory that unit X is overpowered is not to look at the top 8 alone and say, “Look, it was present in all these lists that ended up winning!”, its to compare those outcomes to the seed total, the field of 64 possibilities.

If it’s proportional, then guess what? It’s just what should be happening. Again, it’s not what’s winning, it’s what that is compared to what got entered to try and win in the first place. If a majority of the entered lists are of a composition, and they don’t get proportionally represented, it’s safe to say it’s underperforming. If a minority of lists are of that composition, and over represent in the top 8, then (and only then) can we say that it’s overperforming.

12 minutes ago, lologrelol said:

We saw this same argument with the T-47 and AT-ST.

I and other recommended points reductions in these forums.

We got those. Almost to the exact level I asked for.

POINT COSTS MATTER.

Sure? Nobody said point costs don’t matter, especially in making units appear more or less attractive at first blush, and without crunching any numbers.

17 hours ago, Katsutoshi said:

Actually, you only need one argument for all his trolling to crumble.

You forgot he has a final form. When all of the other specious arguments have crumbled he will run behind the limited size of the data set and say that nothing we've seen indicates solid statistical probability.

But this becomes it's own bellweather. D saying that something is in no way broken, OP, badly costed or poorly designed is a sure indication that the opposite is true.

7 hours ago, syrath said:

I'm actually on the side that Tauntauns aren't necessarily OP

They're not an unstoppable juggernaut, but they are out of budget just a bit.

Personally I think they should drop to speed 2 and get spur. They can still be super maneuverable then but they're a little less faceroll-y.

19 minutes ago, Zrob314 said:

They're not an unstoppable juggernaut, but they are out of budget just a bit.

Personally I think they should drop to speed 2 and get spur. They can still be super maneuverable then but they're a little less faceroll-y.

I'm not sure they need a change , but my second comment is that I wouldn't be concerned if shores and and Tauntauns did, months ago I said that it was too early to call for a nerf when everyone said the sky was falling. What the top 8 lists tells me is that the rebels lack any decent competitive units outside of Tauntauns and 2of their heros, whereas the imperials have quite a few choices, albeit I was glad to see Chewbacca in there, but looking at the imps you have Veers,, Krennik, Palpatine, Bossk , (Vader just got a new boost) so only Boba is left out. The Corp units are badly unbalanced IMO. For imps it appears it shores or cheap objective cappers, and for the rebels it's cheap objective cappers (ie naked stormtroopers or naked rebel troopers) , so the rebels appear to want cheap units to pad activation, Leia for her command cards , Tauntauns and Sabine (because she is cheaper than Luke, which makes the space for the Tauntauns). Just take a look at the variety on the imperial side I the top 8 and the lack of variety on rebel variety in the top 8 tells me that other variations aren't viable just now.

I'm pretty sure Tauntauns will get pretty nuked by the AAT. 4 Red, Critical 2, High Velocity - twice with barrage. Get some surge tokens on there to finish it, or that Lok Durd pilot for suppressive, they gonna be in a bad way. The question will be if CIS shows up in tournaments at all and if they take the tank, but the means for their undoing exists.

11 hours ago, NeonWolf said:

There is no data at this link

EDIT: There is no data at either link

Might need to view in another browser then or not on your phone. There’s about 100+ links in there for you to view.

Also, while @Derrault derails another thread, we’ll be doing all sorts of data analysis with all 120 lists and all the match slips. So we can look at how successful units were throughout the tournament, see average round times, and other useful nuggets. We’ve already analyzed the frequency of units/upgrades/etc taken, but now it’s time to see how they did. These will be stored on the LVO Legion Facebook page, and the Legion Discord.

1 minute ago, TalkPolite said:

Might need to view in another browser then or not on your phone. There’s about 100+ links in there for you to view.

Also, while @Derrault derails another thread, we’ll be doing all sorts of data analysis with all 120 lists and all the match slips. So we can look at how successful units were throughout the tournament, see average round times, and other useful nuggets. We’ve already analyzed the frequency of units/upgrades/etc taken, but now it’s time to see how they did. These will be stored on the LVO Legion Facebook page, and the Legion Discord.

Oh so you did proper data collection this time?