I took a look at the two big Extended tournaments since the points update ( Dathomir and Corellia ), which were both won by Nantex swarms. Defining "Nantex swarm" as a list with six Nantex, there were nine of those lists across the two tournaments and every one of them did very well.

The combined record of those nine lists was 46-8 in Swiss, or 41-3 if you exclude the mirror matches. In the elimination rounds their combined record was 19-6, or 17-4 excluding mirror matches.

That leaves a grand total of seven non-mirror-match losses, and the lists that won games against them were:

• Vader (FCS, Afterburners) + Soontir (Crack Shot + Targeting + Shield) + Grand Inquisitor
• Redline (ProTorps + Prox Mines) + Whisper (Passive + Fifth Bro) + Grand Inquisitor
• (2x win) Seventh Sister + Fifth Brother (Passive + Homing) + 2x Sigma (2x Crack Shot)
• (2x win) 6x Trade Fed Drone (3x Discord) + 2x TUB (2x Plasma Torps)
• Grievous (Title) + 4x Nantex (4x Gravitic Deflection, 3x Crack Shot, 1x Marksmanship)

So... mostly my conclusion is they don't lose to much at all. Those win records are pretty insane. Of their few losses, a little over half were to ace-y lists that could move after the I4 Nantex either by initiative or bid. But it's not much of a pattern, and they certainly beat more of those types of lists than they lost to.

Hopefully we'll see someone figure out a counter by the next big tournament.

I mean of the footage I've seen of the games; not jousting the block of ships seems like a solid game plan, though as always actual mileage may vary.

9 Nantex players all running perfect games and 41 of 44 opponents jousting it seems implausible.

With those kind of figures, I dislike the counter as much as I dislike the Nantex.

In theory.

So to review, the lists that beat Nantex swarm had: 2xForce user, 2xForce user, 2xForce user, a Droid swarm (huh, neat), and a Nantex, uh, mini swarm plus dude...

Greeeeeat. 😑 /S

The next points update

So, just cost the chassis at 51 a pop and be done with it. </grenade_toss>

just being cheeky

"First shalt thou take out your Nantex list . Then shalt thou count Nantexes to five , no more, no less. Five shall be the number thou shalt count, and the number of the counting shall be five . Four shalt thou not count, neither count thou two, excepting that thou then proceed to three. Six is right out. Once the number five , being the fifth number, be reached, then lobbest thou thy Nantex List towards thy foe, who, being naughty in My sight, shall snuff it." - modified from Monty Python

___________________

In other words, I think the price point of 6 plus upgrades per list is probably what makes it too strong. I've only flown Fly Casual against it, but pricing them at 5 w/only space for a few upgrades seems less oppressive. So like 38 to 40 points for the I4.

I feel the bullseye at R1 is easy to land w/stress less reposition, so they get the 4 dice attacks of, say, 5X or 5K. They just also have a 2 die turret and are I4, so I'd say it balances out to only have 5.

I keep shouting this but I don't think it's like to happen. We NEED FFG to schedule minor points "corrections" for March and September every year. These point tweaks would not be extensive but would allow them to correct these sorts of mistakes without making us deal with it for 6 months. Was anyone uncertain by mid February that a 1 point Slave1 Title was a mistake? Is the anyone that can argue that 30 points is a fair price for these PAA?

I'm fine with two "seasons" of hyperspace and point changes. But if they are going to make extensive changes like this, they need a way to fix it faster than currently.

2 minutes ago, HanScottFirst said:

In other words, I think the price point of 6 plus upgrades per list is probably what makes it too strong. I've only flown Fly Casual against it, but pricing them at 5 w/only space for a few upgrades seems less oppressive. So like 38 to 40 points for the I4.

I feel the bullseye at R1 is easy to land w/stress less reposition, so they get the 4 dice attacks of, say, 5X or 5K. They just also have a 2 die turret and are I4, so I'd say it balances out to only have 5.

You realize they were 38 before? Even I think 40 points is too much. 34-ish sounds OK to me. That's all you need to keep 6 off the table. Crack-shot should probably go up too but that's a different story.

3 minutes ago, gamblertuba said:

I'm fine with two "seasons" of hyperspace and point changes. But if they are going to make extensive changes like this, they need a way to fix it faster than currently.

They do have a way. Witness Dormitz.

However, I think it takes more than 2x online tournament to trigger big red button pressing.

At this stage, we're just checking we remember where the button is, just in case.

Before they reset the universe, they also need to be clear what they're resetting it to.

32?, 33? Or 34? I think that's quite a big question.

2 minutes ago, Cuz05 said:

They do have a way. Witness Dormitz.

However, I think it takes more than 2x online tournament to trigger big red button pressing.

Just wait a week... Then 2 weeks after that. I am quite certain this ain't no fluke.

And this automatic poo-pooing of "online" as if that makes much of a difference seems kind of patronizing. 200+ people that are willing to set aside a weekend to play the game is a pretty good sample size. There is a reason the winners are top players IRL too.

@gamblertuba did not realize that. I guess 34-36 is good because it's still only 5, but then the talent upgrades are what put it on par w/5X or 5K. Because when the bullseye is lined up, the upgrades allow it to really count.

2 minutes ago, gamblertuba said:

I am quite certain this ain't no fluke.

I agree.

The online game is different, rather than worse, I think it's worth viewing them slightly separately. Unfortunately, it'll be all we have to go on for a while. I'm hoping one or two more like this will prove enough.

On 9/12/2020 at 11:36 PM, Cuz05 said:

They do have a way. Witness Dormitz.

However, I think it takes more than 2x online tournament to trigger big red button pressing.

It’s not that they won 2 tournaments, it’s how well that the list did by all that took them. The win loss ratio is insane.
30 points is way too cheap. They out joust ace lists and they can out ace swarm lists. I don’t know what FFG were thinking making them 30 points.

5 minutes ago, Cuz05 said:

I agree.

The online game is different, rather than worse, I think it's worth viewing them slightly separately. Unfortunately, it'll be all we have to go on for a while. I'm hoping one or two more like this will prove enough.

I'm really hoping one more. I'm signed up for Crait and no Spamtex would make me very happy indeed. I'd be staggered if they do step in though. I think online competition is legitimate and important. I'm not sure if FFG can take that stance.

More agrees from me.

Apart from I don't play X Wing online, so I have no reason to be concerned about the timeline. It's totally legitimate play, in my eyes, I just don't find it something that can replace real table time for me. I'd rather play PS4.

28 minutes ago, Cuz05 said:

... I don't play X Wing online, so I have no reason to be concerned about the timeline. It's totally legitimate play, in my eyes, I just don't find it something that can replace real table time for me.

This resonates with me. I'm an amateur musician as one of my hobbies and, before the shutdowns, I was a regular on the local open mic scene and had a weekly thing going at a local brew pub on Thursday nights. When that scene dried up some folks tried making "virtual open mic nights" where folks would take turns streaming live performances from our home studios to folks who wanted to tune in. Great idea but, to me, was a sterile experience that left me wanting that real interaction and connection you get from actually being there.

I just got into this game recently so have not had the opportunity to sit at a table across from someone to play it, but that's the experience I want. In fact I've made a point not to create digital lists for practice on Fly Casual that I don't have the physical components to back up; don't want to get into that habit. Just my personal quirk, no shade to folks who feel differently.

1 hour ago, Archangelspiv said:

I don’t know what FFG where thinking making them 30 points.

It might sound harmful to ffg, but when nobody knows what it's about, it's about money.

Firstly, when Nantex came out, we all thought that it was going to be an ace ship. Sun Fac + Ensnare was the build we thought that was a standard build. 3 agi ship with 4 hull and 3 dice only in bullseye as a swarm ship? Nooo, it seemed unreasonable.

But, ensnare was quickly fixed, and now nobody played it anymore.

So, sales dropped.

And now? 6 ships is a succesful list, so it will drag sales, won't it?

5 hours ago, Nyxen said:

I mean of the footage I've seen of the games; not jousting the block of ships seems like a solid game plan, though as always actual mileage may vary.

Links to footage of jousts?

39 minutes ago, Jedu said:

It might sound harmful to ffg, but when nobody knows what it's about, it's about money.

Firstly, when Nantex came out, we all thought that it was going to be an ace ship. Sun Fac + Ensnare was the build we thought that was a standard build. 3 agi ship with 4 hull and 3 dice only in bullseye as a swarm ship? Nooo, it seemed unreasonable.

But, ensnare was quickly fixed, and now nobody played it anymore.

So, sales dropped.

And now? 6 ships is a succesful list, so it will drag sales, won't it?

This is a really tired argument. It’s counterproductive to goose sales if all the opponents hate it and stop playing (and buying). The best bump to sales is a balanced game, full stop. Your starting assumption should always be that the developers aren’t stupid or trying to sabotage their own game, and that they’re on the player’s side. I want to see concrete evidence and not speculation if you want to assert that any of those tenets are not true.

3 hours ago, 5050Saint said:

Links to footage of jousts?

Hope that helps!

1 minute ago, jagsba said:

(Videolinks excised to reduce post size)

Hope that helps!

It does not, sadly. Whisper, GI, Redline didn't joust. I'm also not certain that the RAC list was jousting either, since it got pincered. That Whisper, GI, Redline is one of the few lists/persons that we know have beaten 6 PACEs.

It's like folks have reversed the trite and tired "if both players are jousting, one is doing it wrong" and flipped it on it's head. "If one player engages wrong, it was a joust."

1 hour ago, 5050Saint said:

It does not, sadly. Whisper, GI, Redline didn't joust. I'm also not certain that the RAC list was jousting either, since it got pincered. That Whisper, GI, Redline is one of the few lists/persons that we know have beaten 6 PACEs.

My naive interpretation of the RAC game was that the imp player really actually tried to pincer, but the bugs are so good at range control that they can opt out and defer the timing of the engagement until it kinda looks a little like a joust in the end.

Aethersprites do something similar.