Tell us your opinions in this poll! What pilots are "aces" without any upgrades?

Ace or Not?

Answered.

To me, an ace needs solid reposition abilities as well as high initiative. Their primary strategy to winning is chipping away at an enemy without taking too much incoming fire (or any if done right).

Fenn Rau fang for example is an edge case. He *is* an ace at any range band except for range 1 in the front arc of an enemy. But to a degree, that’s also reducing incoming fire for him by heavily modifying his green dice.

17 minutes ago, ScummyRebel said:

Answered.

To me, an ace needs solid reposition abilities as well as high initiative. Their primary strategy to winning is chipping away at an enemy without taking too much incoming fire (or any if done right).

Fenn Rau fang for example is an edge case. He *is* an ace at any range band except for range 1 in the front arc of an enemy. But to a degree, that’s also reducing incoming fire for him by heavily modifying his green dice.

Yeah I generally feel that ace needs to be able to double reposition. My edge case was Guri, her unique barrel still kinda counts because she has a lot of options even if it isn't double repo.

If the community ever agrees on the definition of an ace Hoth will melt.

Also, I think an Ace should be a small base. Medium and large bases can easily be blocked and they have less possibilities to position themselves.

Some pilots that I consider « aces » that doesn't have double reposition:

- Duchess, for the opportunity of using her ailerons or not (so choice of reposition at their init, kind of supernatural without paying the cost)

- Guri for the completely funky barrel rolls

5 minutes ago, reqent said:

Yeah I generally feel that ace needs to be able to double reposition. My edge case was Guri, her unique barrel still kinda counts because she has a lot of options even if it isn't double repo.

I don’t necessarily think you need the ability to double reposition in the same activation, but you *do* need both options at your disposal in some way.

2 hours ago, reqent said:

Yeah I generally feel that ace needs to be able to double reposition. My edge case was Guri, her unique barrel still kinda counts because she has a lot of options even if it isn't double repo.

If the community ever agrees on the definition of an ace Hoth will melt.

2 hours ago, ScummyRebel said:

I don’t necessarily think you need the ability to double reposition in the same activation, but you *do* need both options at your disposal in some way.

Yeah, the ambiguity of what defines an "Ace" is why we developed the poll. Any criteria that we came up with usually had exceptions, so it came down to feels. Is it double repositon at high initiative? Is it reposition and a mod?

3 hours ago, reqent said:

If the community ever agrees on the definition of an ace Hoth will melt.

^This.^ 😎 🍺

Overall it comes down to being I5 or higher, small base, maneuverable, not being in a support role, and apparently not being in a TIE/LN (sorry Mauler and Scourge).

Han, Lando, Boba, etc. are kinda like "heavy aces" where they're decently fast, scary, points fortress-esque, but I don't put them in the same category as Soontir, Vader, etc.

Wedge, Luke, and Thane are just about as un-maneuverable as I'll consider an ace to be because they have a few tricks and they're hardly slow.

Howl, Airen, and Serissu are all dedicated support ships so they're not aces to me.

The one exception to all of my rules would be Rebel Sabine if she were on there. Despite being I3, she's super fast and unpredictable to the point where initiative doesn't matter as much.

1 hour ago, Npmartian said:

The one exception to all of my rules would be Rebel Sabine if she were on there. Despite being I3, she's super fast and unpredictable to the point where initiative doesn't matter as much.

Echo is my exception. She plays by rules that most ships don't.

My definition of an ace is a ship that can win 100% of the 1 v 1s in the late game against generic fighters (think t-65). That's why ships like echo can be included in the list, even though they are not the highest initiative their unique flying patterns allow them to dominate most 1 v 1s. At the same time, I wouldn't consider Vader an actual ace because he has to rely on dice to actually beat the opponent, so there is a chance he can lose against a generic t-65

Ace at Base?

All that she wants is another upgrade

So if you are in sight and the lock is tight
She's a hunter, you're the faun
The gentle voice that talks to you
Won't talk forever
It is a night for dicin'
But the missile means goodbye
Beware of what is flashing in her eyes
She's going to get you

6 hours ago, LeMightyASP said:

My definition of an ace is a ship that can win 100% of the 1 v 1s in the late game against generic fighters (think t-65). That's why ships like echo can be included in the list, even though they are not the highest initiative their unique flying patterns allow them to dominate most 1 v 1s. At the same time, I wouldn't consider Vader an actual ace because he has to rely on dice to actually beat the opponent, so there is a chance he can lose against a generic t-65

That's a very good definition. Far more concrete than most, and certainly more than my nebulous definition.

My definition of an Ace is a piece that attempts to directly exploit arcdodging and reposition effects to minimize incoming damage and effectively have 'infinite' agility vs most potential attackers, using perfect information granted by high initiative as the piece's primary strategy. If they decide to take a fight, they do so with an I-kill advantage.

So, for example, Norra is not an ace, despite generally winning any 1v1 late game matchup. Neither are Luke or Wedge, despite having more realistic reposition potential, because it isn't generally something they can depend on. Herra has some of the best reposition in the game via dial modification, but it ain't enough to make a large consistently arc dodge, so its more a trick to maintain her uptime and avoid some arcs rather than to actually deny interaction.

Whisper, despite not being able to double repo in a traditional manner, is an ace. An ace denotes a strategy of a ship, more than specific capabilities, though there is bleedover between any arc dodging ship like a TIE/LN and an ace mostly defined by how much you expect to have perfect information when you make your reposition. Vader is the most 'platonic' ace as their entire strategy is this and they suffer extremely heavily when they are forced to do more than a 1v1. Guri likewise is an ace because she has the ability to modify where she ends up so much she basically has triple reposition.

Some ships can on top of arc dodging to victory just facemash enemies, like Fenn or Boba, due to absurd modification effects. I sometimes hear them called 'mega aces' but in reality they are just brawlers who can also ace. Acing is also slightly contextual, I4s can be aces depending on how you slot em, and the matchup determines how much of an ace they are allowed to be. Ahsoka is a fantastic example of this in Republic Quad Aces. Some matches they are demoted to 'mere' arc dodges, but in the meta that list existed the entire list was demoted because the main ace list in that meta would run bids as deep as 20 points.

Its also super contextual: Jake is almost never an ace at the start of the game because he wants to stick to a buddy, but at any time if necessary he can transition into an ace. This is also why certain other high initiative pieces with good repo sometimes aren't aces.

Put it another way: When you hear 'I am playing an aces list' what are you imagining? Your imagining lots of high initiative arc dodging and attempts to minimize your time on target. Is that what the piece does in your list? Congrats, its an ace. Nailing down the 'core' of the category is more important than edge cases, as while its possible to say 'Any ship that can reposition with I5 or I6 on a small is an ace' I think we can agree that maybe Tomax Bren isn't an ace. Any attempt to denote it with specific, absolute precision is doomed to fail on those edge cases, just like anything that is ultimately an arbitrary categorization that is essentially a 'genre' does.

Petition to use "arcdodger" instead of ace

1 hour ago, GreenDragoon said:

Petition to use "arcdodger" instead of ace

But aces is such great branding! Aces being on a platform that can support them guarantees sales!

I agree in the end though. Calling it 'aces' sorta creates this weird thing where aces lists get a bit more... out of universe prestige and hype that perhaps they deserve, and forces every ace pilot in the setting to have similar capabilities to fit the title. Its sorta TOO good branding.

14 hours ago, GreenDragoon said:

Petition to use "arcdodger" instead of ace

Those aren’t the same thing at all. Make your own poll if you want to talk about something else.

On 10/15/2020 at 1:56 PM, MidWestScrub said:

Tell us your opinions in this poll! What pilots are "aces" without any upgrades?

Ace or Not?

Can you tag me when you share results? I think I might have a blog to run off this poll if it has enough responses.

27 minutes ago, Stay OT Leader said:

Can you tag me when you share results? I think I might have a blog to run off this poll if it has enough responses.

Sure!

4 hours ago, Stay OT Leader said:

Those aren’t the same thing at all. Make your own poll if you want to talk about something else.

Ok, then I do not see the value of "ace" as term in this game. Curious to see what you'll come up with.

"Arcdodger" on the other hand is really useful to describe a kind of pilot.

19 minutes ago, GreenDragoon said:

I do not see the value of "ace" as term in this game

I doubt that it really has ever been useful though.

53 minutes ago, GreenDragoon said:

Ok, then I do not see the value of "ace" as term in this game. Curious to see what you'll come up with.

"Arcdodger" on the other hand is really useful to describe a kind of pilot.

I think that's exactly the point.

1 hour ago, ClassicalMoser said:

I doubt that it really has ever been useful though.

I low key think its an active negative.

If it was just an 'arcdodger' list rather than an 'aces' list a lot of the overwhelming arcdodger pilots would have been nerfed a lot more a while ago, and the strategy of tri-aces could be examined from a game health perspective, because they low key expose a lot of flaws in a deathmatch scenario, the bid system, the initiative system, ect, and it might make sense for 'I need to win initiative in a mirror match or I am at such a huge disadvantage I probably lose' to not be a strategy for lists.

The word 'ace' has just a ton of emotional baggage that warps how characters are designed and how people self evaluate lists. It gives them too much mystique, makes all aces lists feel more important than they are, and helps frame nerfs to things that exist as anti-ace tools as 'anti-NPE tools' because it normalizes the idea that aces should just get to enact their ace strategy in every game.

My definition of an Ace is a high initiative ship, 5-6, that excel at a particular archetype, arch-dodger, alpha strike, brawler, finisher, ect...

What others have described as aces fit the archype of arch-dodgers, but not all arch-dodgers are aces. For example TIE interceptors are arc-dodgers, but Soontir excels at it and is considered an Ace because of his ability and his initiative.

Wedge then can be considered an Ace because, depending on his load out, he can excel at a alpha-strike or as a finisher. Just load him out with torps or outmaneuver.

Not all high initative ships should be considered aces however. Resistance Han and even Rebel Han I wouldn't consider Ace's, as they don't excel at anything in particular. Rebel Han is a good alrounder.

Not to say aces are limited to small bases, as Boba is an exceptional Brawler, Dash is an exceptional finisher.

Sure you get the point.

So when I hear people say they are playing a trip-ace list, they are usually indicating three exceptional arch-dodgers.

New idea: let’s deliberately redefine “Ace” to “Anything I5-6” whether it can arc-dodge or not.

Scum Han is an Ace. Rebel Fenn is an Ace. Dengar is an Ace. Howlrunner is an Ace. Paige Tico is an Ace. Leia is an Ace.

This allows us to talk about iconic or “Good” pilots in a specific context while leaving the discussion of passive mods and arc-dodging to more nuanced terminology. I5+ has always been special in this game and “Ace” is just easier to say.

So what if we talked about Jousting aces, Freighter aces, Bomber aces, Arc-dodging aces, Force aces, Support aces, and everything in between with a little more specificity.

Also conforms to my initiative head canon:

I1: Rookie

I2: Trainee

I3: Pilot

I4: Hotshot

I5: Ace

I6: Legend

11 minutes ago, ClassicalMoser said:

Scum Han is an Ace. Rebel Fenn is an Ace. Dengar is an Ace. Howlrunner is an Ace. Paige Tico is an Ace. Leia is an Ace.

This allows us to talk about iconic or “Good” pilots in a specific context while leaving the discussion of passive mods and arc-dodging to more nuanced terminology. I5+ has always been special in this game and “Ace” is just easier to say.

There is the issue where this limits the design space still of putting 'ace pilots' at I5 and I6. And it is weird in cases where I5 and I6 characters aren't ace pilots. Obi-Wan is a fantastic example, as lore wise he is downright an 'anti-ace.'