7 hours ago, Blail Blerg said:

If I win the game regardless of the bomb, its likely the value of the bomb didn't overcome the skill gap that I have vs the other player.

If dice were not involved I would agree with you whole heartedly. Sometimes it is impossible to overcome the randomness of the effing little buggers. I'm sure you've had games where your die rolls were abysmal at best.

You were right about the rudeness. I missed a couple of the snarky replies. To paraphrase a line from an old movie, "No matter where you go, there they are".

25 minutes ago, Cuz05 said:

This is exactly how those who have disdain for the topic could have phrased it.

X Wing intelligence is one thing. Social intelligence is another. Do not allow an excess of the former to excuse a dearth of the latter.

I think one of the ways we've gone wrong lately in our various discourses is thinking social intelligence means never saying things other people don't want to hear. We are quite willing to allow someone's hurt feelings to undermine intellectual rigor.

1 minute ago, Stoneface said:

If dice were not involved I would agree with you whole heartedly. Sometimes it is impossible to overcome the randomness of the effing little buggers. I'm sure you've had games where your die rolls were abysmal at best.

You were right about the rudeness. I missed a couple of the snarky replies. To paraphrase a line from an old movie, "No matter where you go, there they are".

Thanks it does help to have some nicer opinions.

I do honestly try to never blame dice nor depend on them but I understand the sentiment well.

1 minute ago, Frimmel said:

I think one of the ways we've gone wrong lately in our various discourses is thinking social intelligence means never saying things other people don't want to hear. We are quite willing to allow someone's hurt feelings to undermine intellectual rigor.

That’s definitely not the excuse for rudeness here.

Just now, Blail Blerg said:

I do honestly try to never blame dice nor depend on them but I understand the sentiment well.

What makes those game losses sting so much is that we shared the same pool of dice!

1 minute ago, Blail Blerg said:

That’s definitely not the excuse for rudeness here.

One doesn't get to be rude in place of argument and one doesn't get to say that a rude response provides support that they are correct. A lack of diplomacy and charm and niceties may not be persuasive but neither is it evidence of factual error.

sorry, but I'm not going to write any "counterargument [that] understands and expects and preemptively rebuts counter-argument back" when @Blail Blerg didn't even properly reply to your point about area denial @Stoneface

The other bit ("Mostarguments I see don't have that capacity, they're one sided and only from one viewpoint.") could also be seen as rather rude. Glasshouses and so on.

14 minutes ago, Frimmel said:

I think one of the ways we've gone wrong lately in our various discourses is thinking social intelligence means never saying things other people don't want to hear. We are quite willing to allow someone's hurt feelings to undermine intellectual rigor.

I understand.

To me, on that angle, social intelligence gives a person the ability to put the right word, or action, in the right place, for mutual benefit.

It allows us to connect with others and form a strong society. Using our intelligence to find a way to say the thing and have it connect in an enlightening way is a smart move.

Saying the thing and having the relevant ears just snap closed on it, is a waste of air. It's the definition of dumb.

One love, social folks. We're all in this madness together

For a specific pilot, I've found Y-Wing Norra to be a useful carrier. She does well at getting to range 1 and surviving the round, thus able to drop a bomb the following round. Too many platforms either can't get into good bombing positions, or they can but they die. The solution to this tends to be, at least for me, to bring them on mass if you want to make them work. Probably the best 'bomb list' I have seen in 2e was the 4x K-Wing list with Barrage, Protons, and one carrying Sabine. 4 medium bases, with huge arc coverage, and a way to add extra punishment to bombs (plus the ability to SLAM out, reload and then come back in), made that list pretty scary and the bombs were a huge part of that.

27 minutes ago, Cuz05 said:

I understand.

To me, on that angle, social intelligence gives a person the ability to put the right word, or action, in the right place, for mutual benefit.

It allows us to connect with others and form a strong society. Using our intelligence to find a way to say the thing and have it connect in an enlightening way is a smart move.

Saying the thing and having the relevant ears just snap closed on it, is a waste of air. It's the definition of dumb.

One love, social folks. We're all in this madness together

I would say that the use of rudeness is actually a form of social intelligence. It is a recognition that one needs to be persuasive. If facts and logic are not sufficient (they often are not) one tends to bring emotion into the fray. It is emotions that connect.

1 hour ago, Frimmel said:

I think one of the ways we've gone wrong lately in our various discourses is thinking social intelligence means never saying things other people don't want to hear. We are quite willing to allow someone's hurt feelings to undermine intellectual rigor.

100%. The consequence of saying something stupid should be getting told that it’s stupid.

3 minutes ago, Frimmel said:

I would say that the use of rudeness is actually a form of social intelligence. It is a recognition that one needs to be persuasive. If facts and logic are not sufficient (they often are not) one tends to bring emotion into the fray. It is emotions that connect.

Oh I'm gonna disagree here, heh. Words can be extremely mutable. When facts and logic do not necessarily hit the spot, alternate phrasing is still a viable route. Identifying the exact nature of the hang, where previous words have failed, can lead to new ways of saying similar things that sidestep that particular obstacle.

Although I certainly use the tools you mention with my kids occasionally

21 minutes ago, Stay OT Leader said:

100%. The consequence of saying something stupid should be getting told that it’s stupid.

This just serves the ego of the not stupid. It does not turn the stupid into clever.

Whether the latter is possible just depends on how much of a pessimist you are and how generous you feel like being. It's a matter of belief.

But sure, if your ego means you wish to view the stupid as irrecoverable, then go straight in with the rude and give yourself a big pat on the back for being clever.

Mutual benefit. If there is none, you achieve nothing. That's not intelligence.

Edit. I'd like to disassociate myself with the word stupid. It's nothing but an insult. A more useful term would be 'incomplete understanding leading to erroneous beliefs' But that's kind of a mouthful to insert here....

But the not-stupid became not-stupid by listening to people who said he was stupid. The stupid remain stupid by complaining about being called stupid.

There is ego in play here but it’s not mine.

3 hours ago, Stay OT Leader said:

I think we are at the point where the original post and it’s assertions are at such a clear and obvious break from reality that you can’t really engage with rational arguments. If rational arguments and evidence of success was going to work then the OP wouldn’t have said what he said in the first place.

Proton Bombs are currently the 9th best upgrade card in the game according to metawing. They just won the biggest x-wing tournament of the year. Along with Proxy Mines they’re considered key elements of making many ships viable and have demonstrated that repeatedly over the last 18 months.

And if none of that made you go “huh, maybe I’m wrong and should recheck my valuations and how I think about the game as I’m obviously missing something” then it’s unlikely anybody on this forum will be able to shake your cast iron conviction that the best players in the world are doing it wrong and you know best.

You make a good point. The problem is you are comparing an apple (OP) to the orchard (Metawing). What the OP flies and flies against is a very small sample compared to what Metawing samples and in that light is how the original post should be viewed. Not everyone looks at the stats that Metawing posts. I don't. I really don't care what the world is using. I build what I like or want to try out. If it works, fine. If not, why doesn't it.

In my limited experience I've found bombs to be more effective as a threat. Especially versus lightly shielded, high agility aces. Not to say that I haven't bloodied the nose of a ship or two that got too close or got surrounded by asteroids. It's kinds of fun to see the "Oh c**p" light bulb go on in an opponent's eyes when you drop something.

Now you may hang on every post by from Metawing which is fine, but there are a lot of us that don't give a rodent's rump for what's in Metawing. It's ok to to cite their stats to bolster your assertions but such phrases as "clear and obvious break from reality" really don't belong here. They are better suited to a term paper.

34 minutes ago, Cuz05 said:

Edit. I'd like to disassociate myself with the word stupid. It's nothing but an insult. A more useful term would be 'incomplete understanding leading to erroneous beliefs' But that's kind of a mouthful to insert here....

Try misinformed or ill-informed. Neither implies lack of intelligence or out of touch with reality.

41 minutes ago, Cuz05 said:

Whether the latter is possible just depends on how much of a pessimist you are and how generous you feel like being. It's a matter of belief.

Well yes, but this and other threads aren't in a vacuum, right? Chances are high that you've had direct interactions with a lot of the people replying. You know already whether your investment in time and effort will be worth it.

To phrase it as "being generous" might sound very arrogant, but it hits the core of the issue. If somebody really does know better, do they want to invest time to explain to others why they are wrong? Or do they simply chuckle and not correct them*? It is the reason why we should remain humble and let others tell us we're wrong - because they might be right. It is immediate punishment for past behavior in a social environment.

I'm for example pretty set about optics, but I did consider the points before dismissing them based on what I saw as better arguments. In this case the premise is pretty far fetched, and the responses should be enough to indicate that bombs are rather often worth their points. I for one was only interested in pointing out that he's likely wrong, but I don't want to invest effort to correct the erroneous beliefs due to incomplete understanding. Which I agree with, btw, calling it stupid is... stupid.

E: *Story time: Two decades ago, little GreenDragoon started kung fu. One of the most important lessons I had learnt then might not be popular, but to this day I agree with it: It is not to be wrong and corrected which you should be afraid of, but the opposite. To be wrong but nobody around you caring about that fact. You only correct others if you care about them being wrong. Now, of course that is not entirely true on the internet, as everyone loves to argue about mundane details. But inverse is still largely true

57 minutes ago, Frimmel said:

I would say that the use of rudeness is actually a form of social intelligence. It is a recognition that one needs to be persuasive. If facts and logic are not sufficient (they often are not) one tends to bring emotion into the fray. It is emotions that connect.

To this I disagree. If you fail to persuade someone with dispassionate logic, resorting to a tirade just shows your lack of maturity and possibly intelligence. You'll never win an argument with a brick wall no matter how many names you call it. In no way am I implying that the OP is stubborn. Please see my response to Stay OT Leader above.

20 minutes ago, Stay OT Leader said:

But the not-stupid became not-stupid by listening to people who said he was stupid. The stupid remain stupid by complaining about being called stupid.

There is ego in play here but it’s not mine.

You're really reaching.

1 hour ago, Frimmel said:

A lack of diplomacy and charm and niceties may not be persuasive but neither is it evidence of factual error.

You are correct BUT the fastest way to lose a discussion is to resort to rudeness to reinforce your arguments. The person you are trying to persuade just thinks "F.U." and ignores the rest of the rant regardless if your arguments are valid. The only reason for rudeness is a lack of maturity.

I find that bombs generally get back their value in a list.

With the high ship count common right now, it isn't hard to ping one damage off of at least one ship with a Seismic. And that really where I see it as breaking value.

You've cleared a rock, which likely matters quite a bit if you've got clunky chunky bombers. You've done some damage to the opponent (albeit a very little), but for 3 points, eh, it's free damage that doesn't take an attack. I'll take it. And, you've forced them to keep one extra wheel going in their head while planning maneuvers and engagements - how do they fly around your bombs? Heck, you can just not think about it yourself, if you really want to, and then drop one when your gut tells you to. At that point you're paying for an attention advantage.

Generally, I find that they're worth it, but, imo, more as point filler on a ship you were already bringing, rather than a complete build around. They can be a bit tricky to make work if you're somewhere between the "Emon, Sol, and third all bombers" and the "single bomb tossed on my Y-Ion" - at that point, you really need to leverage them for their value to show through.

22 minutes ago, Stoneface said:

You are correct BUT the fastest way to lose a discussion is to resort to rudeness to reinforce your arguments. The person you are trying to persuade just thinks "F.U." and ignores the rest of the rant regardless if your arguments are valid. The only reason for rudeness is a lack of maturity.

I disagree with all of that, but it’s a philosophical thing so we’re unlikely to find much common ground there.

Geez some of you guys are really frakking mean.

Anyway, @Blail Blerg Try my list. x5 Grey Squadron bombers with Ion (Rear only! Don't move it!!!) + Proton Bombs. Please, give my boys and girls a shot. I think you'll be pleasantly surprised- and I want to hear what you think about it.

On 2/17/2020 at 4:05 AM, Tvboy said:

In my experience, the only way old fashioned bombs like protons and seismics work is when you run them in multiples and create a net. It's so easy to avoid a single bomb because they are so easy to predict and pretty much every ship can reposition, but drop 2 or 3 bombs at once in combination with some obstacles and you can actually force some damage through.

I agree with Tvboy (and a few others) that have said that massed Bombs gets you better mileage. Back in 1st Ed I flew 4 Tie Bombers with Seismic and had really good success, but part of that was due to the fact that no one saw Tie Bombers and/or Seismic Charges. Darkhorse wrote up a great article for a strategy that used 4 Tie Bombers (including Jonus). I used it for good success with being able to cause a bomb fest and then drop a bunch of Bombs. People wouldn't expect it and had a hard time getting past my own ships and then away from the Bombs.

I haven't tried it in 2nd Ed, but things became so much cheaper that when I went to rebuild the list, I had a lot of points left over and am not sure on the best way to use them.

On 2/17/2020 at 3:22 AM, Blail Blerg said:

3. Tie bombers - Ew no. - These things just would rather be boring barrage rockets chassi. Their hull configuration makes them poor in addition, and not really worth more than their value naked with just bombs. Also Sep bombers do this job better.

I have no knock against Hyenas as I think they are also great, but I don't think that Hyenas always do it better than Tie Bombers. This is especially true since Tie Bombers can drop at an angle (1 bank) and that adds nuance that the Hyena can't. It also means you can drop a bigger "net" of Bombs that is harder to get away from. If you want to spend the points for a Bombardier, you can even drop them at a 2 bank! That's something pretty cool that can still catch people by surprise.

I also think that Barrage Rockets and Proton Bombs are pretty good as it gives you a cheap and effective Bomber.

I did come up with a list that I think would be fun to try:

Captain Jonus (45)
Cluster Missiles (5)
Proton Bombs (5)
Shield Upgrade (6)

“Deathfire” (32)
Barrage Rockets (8)
Proton Bombs (5)

Scimitar Squadron Pilot (27)
Barrage Rockets (8)
Proton Bombs (5)

Tomax Bren (35)
Crack Shot (1)
Proton Torpedoes (13)
Proton Bombs (5)
Total: 200

Tomax has the Proton Torpedo as he can move late enough that he can get the TL and get a shot, hopefully with Jonus still alive. I doubt he will get to use Crackshot, but I had a point sitting in there.

Jonus stays alive and can try to fire his Cluster Missiles if he gets the chance. He can reroll for both volleys, but I don't expect him to live too long.

The main idea is to get up in a good spot to trade shots, and then drop the Bombs and do 5 K-turn.

===

You also didn't mention Tie Punishers, which I think are pretty good. They have the System slot that can get you Trajectory Simulator, as well.

I will also state that with many lists with Generics out there, Bombs are pretty useful. I also didn't talk about Mines, either.

I was flying Chiraneau/Whisper for a while, and the Proton Bombs were definitely valuable there. First, it discouraged opponents from flying behind Chiraneau. Second, that list relied heavily on attacking tokenless targets (Hotshot Gunner, Vader crew, Juke). Anything that encouraged opponents to do things other than take a focus or calculate action action helped me push damage through.