RegisterDonateLogin

Has taught you well.

Welcome Guest Active Topics | Members

Proposition to try to Improve the overall game experience Options
jen'ari
Posted: Tuesday, September 27, 2022 5:02:12 AM
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 5/3/2014
Posts: 2,098
Activation Cap is not going to fix anything. People will just Max it out. Thrawn and max activations is still just as large an issue. State that you can only have up to 3 living non-unique pieces that cost 9 or less or something like that.
That helps the Bib popping people that dont move as well.
Cassus fett
Posted: Tuesday, September 27, 2022 5:33:11 AM
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 6/10/2010
Posts: 749
Location: The Shadowlands of Kashyyyk
jen'ari wrote:
Activation Cap is not going to fix anything. People will just Max it out. Thrawn and max activations is still just as large an issue. State that you can only have up to 3 living non-unique pieces that cost 9 or less or something like that.
That helps the Bib popping people that dont move as well.


No offense, but how about at this point we just Ban Jabba or Bib or Thrawn? Adding these squad building restrictions just creates convoluted scenarios. Look at how many modifiers are on your proposed solution [“3” “living” “non-unique” “cost 9 or less”.]

Four conditions to be met, just to say, “don’t bring 12 Rodian Brutes to completely blow out your opponent’s activation count. So you get your opportunist.
jen'ari
Posted: Tuesday, September 27, 2022 6:13:57 AM
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 5/3/2014
Posts: 2,098
Cassus fett wrote:
jen'ari wrote:
Activation Cap is not going to fix anything. People will just Max it out. Thrawn and max activations is still just as large an issue. State that you can only have up to 3 living non-unique pieces that cost 9 or less or something like that.
That helps the Bib popping people that dont move as well.


No offense, but how about at this point we just Ban Jabba or Bib or Thrawn? Adding these squad building restrictions just creates convoluted scenarios. Look at how many modifiers are on your proposed solution [“3” “living” “non-unique” “cost 9 or less”.]

Four conditions to be met, just to say, “don’t bring 12 Rodian Brutes to completely blow out your opponent’s activation count. So you get your opportunist.



People don't want to ban Thrawn as far as I know. Brought it up years ago when people said Ozzel was the problem. Master Tactician, swap, and out activate is too powerful. He should cost 60.
I, personally, am on board with Banning pieces. We are so far away from WOTC. The best thing to do is what is most fun for the community.
Cassus fett
Posted: Tuesday, September 27, 2022 6:21:21 AM
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 6/10/2010
Posts: 749
Location: The Shadowlands of Kashyyyk
jen'ari wrote:
Cassus fett wrote:
jen'ari wrote:
Activation Cap is not going to fix anything. People will just Max it out. Thrawn and max activations is still just as large an issue. State that you can only have up to 3 living non-unique pieces that cost 9 or less or something like that.
That helps the Bib popping people that dont move as well.


No offense, but how about at this point we just Ban Jabba or Bib or Thrawn? Adding these squad building restrictions just creates convoluted scenarios. Look at how many modifiers are on your proposed solution [“3” “living” “non-unique” “cost 9 or less”.]

Four conditions to be met, just to say, “don’t bring 12 Rodian Brutes to completely blow out your opponent’s activation count. So you get your opportunist.



People don't want to ban Thrawn as far as I know. Brought it up years ago when people said Ozzel was the problem. Master Tactician, swap, and out activate is too powerful. He should cost 60.
I, personally, am on board with Banning pieces. We are so far away from WOTC. The best thing to do is what is most fun for the community.


100% agree. The game is spinning it’s wheels with “ooo I don’t want to ban pieces. What if we do x,y,z?” How’s about we make some simple decisions like Ban these pierces most people agree are broken? What’s the worst that could happen? In 6 months time we decide “ah you know, Thrawn wasn’t that bad, bring him back.”
thereisnotry
Posted: Tuesday, September 27, 2022 6:48:27 AM
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 4/29/2008
Posts: 1,685
Location: Canada
Here's the thing: almost none of these overpowered pieces or squads were played throughout the year very much at all. They only showed up at VassalCon (not even GenCon). So banning a piece for a short period of time doesn't do anything...we either have to ban a piece forever or find a way to fix it (and the fix has to actually solve the problem).

I think there needs to be a specific thread (so as not to take this one off topic) discussing what people consider the problems to be.
jen'ari
Posted: Tuesday, September 27, 2022 7:00:05 AM
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 5/3/2014
Posts: 2,098
thereisnotry wrote:
Here's the thing: almost none of these overpowered pieces or squads were played throughout the year very much at all. They only showed up at VassalCon (not even GenCon). So banning a piece for a short period of time doesn't do anything...we either have to ban a piece forever or find a way to fix it (and the fix has to actually solve the problem).

I think there needs to be a specific thread (so as not to take this one off topic) discussing what people consider the problems to be.


Ban the piece forever. Vassalcon is not a measure of the meta at all. 1 Jabba squad proves that. No Thrawn proves that.
Mando
Posted: Tuesday, September 27, 2022 10:36:32 AM
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 10/14/2008
Posts: 1,349
Location: Chokio, MN
jen'ari wrote:
thereisnotry wrote:
Here's the thing: almost none of these overpowered pieces or squads were played throughout the year very much at all. They only showed up at VassalCon (not even GenCon). So banning a piece for a short period of time doesn't do anything...we either have to ban a piece forever or find a way to fix it (and the fix has to actually solve the problem).

I think there needs to be a specific thread (so as not to take this one off topic) discussing what people consider the problems to be.


Ban the piece forever. Vassalcon is not a measure of the meta at all. 1 Jabba squad proves that. No Thrawn proves that.


Sounds like you don't want Imperials to win anything. Without Thrawn, they have no top squads. I've gone against Thrawn squads plenty of times. They are very good. but there are viable counters Thrawn swap just like everything else. I've beaten them plenty of times, even with the OR (used a Army of Light jedi squad to do it). Some factions have very good disruptive pieces. Some factions have access to Never tell me the odds. Every faction has access to a Muun Tactics broker, which as long as games don't last to many rounds, is actually a very viable way to win key inits. Thrawn has an incredible combination of 3 amazing mechanics, but that is kinda what the Imperial squads need.

Thrawn has existed for a very long time......why now is he all of a sudden this dire issue that needs to be banned forever? You don't like the piece, and that is fine. Maybe the squads you like playing just don't fare well against him. But that doesn't mean he is an issue that calls for him to be banned for everyone. Do you really think that because you have issues with facing him or Jabba that a vast majority of other players do also? Sorry, but there are a lot of really good players out there, who actually play in a lot of tournaments, and find ways to beat Thrawn and Jabba's mechanics. The only time a ban was absolutely necessary was Daala, because at the time, there was no good counter to her. Everyone tried for years to find a good counter, but she won everything easily and was a serious issue. Jabba and Thrawn aren't anywhere near the problem as what Daala was pre errata.

VassalCon is the most competitive tournament of the year. For you to diminish it like you have really is insulting to all the people who participate in it. And i think that must be your goal here, because you like to complain an awful lot about a) results of tournaments you don't participate in or b) pieces you don't personally use.

shmi15
Posted: Tuesday, September 27, 2022 11:13:44 AM
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 4/19/2010
Posts: 1,290
Is it Not possible to “soft ban until a resolution is found”

Covers two things

People can reassess a piece and it’spower, while simultaneously seeing the meta if you were to just ban it.

2 birds one stone

There’s still groups willing to come play and put in time to help. But not in the current state of the game.

jen'ari
Posted: Tuesday, September 27, 2022 11:52:16 AM
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 5/3/2014
Posts: 2,098
Mando wrote:

Sounds like you don't want Imperials to win anything. Without Thrawn, they have no top squads. I've gone against Thrawn squads plenty of times. They are very good. but there are viable counters Thrawn swap just like everything else. I've beaten them plenty of times, even with the OR (used a Army of Light jedi squad to do it). Some factions have very good disruptive pieces. Some factions have access to Never tell me the odds. Every faction has access to a Muun Tactics broker, which as long as games don't last to many rounds, is actually a very viable way to win key inits. Thrawn has an incredible combination of 3 amazing mechanics, but that is kinda what the Imperial squads need.

Thrawn has existed for a very long time......why now is he all of a sudden this dire issue that needs to be banned forever? You don't like the piece, and that is fine. Maybe the squads you like playing just don't fare well against him. But that doesn't mean he is an issue that calls for him to be banned for everyone. Do you really think that because you have issues with facing him or Jabba that a vast majority of other players do also? Sorry, but there are a lot of really good players out there, who actually play in a lot of tournaments, and find ways to beat Thrawn and Jabba's mechanics. The only time a ban was absolutely necessary was Daala, because at the time, there was no good counter to her. Everyone tried for years to find a good counter, but she won everything easily and was a serious issue. Jabba and Thrawn aren't anywhere near the problem as what Daala was pre errata.

VassalCon is the most competitive tournament of the year. For you to diminish it like you have really is insulting to all the people who participate in it. And i think that must be your goal here, because you like to complain an awful lot about a) results of tournaments you don't participate in or b) pieces you don't personally use.



I love Imperials. I love Vader, I Love Sidious. That is who should own Imperials, not Thrawn. Thrawn should be a good support in the faction. He is cool and powerful.

Thrawn has won the most tournaments BY FAR (gencon, regionals, etc). "There are counters" is not really an answer because the counters, historically, have failed time and time again.

Thrawn has been the #1 or #2 option the entire time he has been a piece.
The TN way of playing Thrawn is not really an issue. We created melee pieces that take care of it. Banned Ozzel and Booming Voice, no issue anymore for us because melee force user pieces are powerful.
We are not afraid to get rid of bad things.

Tons of good really good players out there that beat their mechanics? They would be better just playing Jabba or Thrawn and not risking it. Why fight an uphill battle?

Looking at the squads at Vassalcon it is a joke. It is a joke because no one wanted to be as competitive as possible.
You can think whatever you want. I have always wanted the game to be fun. I have always fought for the game to be fun. I play the game probably more than most. Heck I have Play tested more than most on set 24. I used to be a maiin play tester until the stupid first draft of Old Republic Revan came out. What a joke that was. That was the last straw on how hopeless the Design team was. They did a great job with set 21.
I Love the "idea of the game" The players behind the scenes just can't seem to fix it. It is getting closer but has taken a decade. We have know everything about the game we do now 8 years ago.

PS Jabba and Thrawn should win every tournament that they are played by a top player. It is just that no one plays the top meta squads as much..... because they are not fun. No one likes playing Thrawn or playing against him.
gholli69
Posted: Tuesday, September 27, 2022 12:26:39 PM
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 5/12/2012
Posts: 452
Location: Kokomo, IN
Jenari, I think you are wrong about people not wanting to be competitive at vasselcon. I know it may seem that way but let me give a little insight as to why I say that. I was one of the three gungan squads run that day which is strange that there were that many gunman squads. However, I personally felt like the meta was going to be melee heavy tank squads with 7-9 activations which looking at several of the other tournaments this year seemed to be the way the meta was leaning. I decided to play a squad that is pretty good at tank busting but unfortunately, that wasn't the field that showed up for vasselcon. So yes there was some thought put into trying to be competitive with a gungan squad and I would bet I wasn't the only one with a similar thought process. As for activation cap, I think porgs already do a pretty good job of evening out large activation inequalities especially against Thrawn where the normal tactic is to out activate and then go with your heavy hitters late in the round. If you can spin porgs and wait to use the meat of your squad later against the Thrawn player then it definitely reduces Thrawns effectiveness. I don't mind the idea of trying out 150 to see how it shakes out.
jen'ari
Posted: Tuesday, September 27, 2022 1:05:58 PM
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 5/3/2014
Posts: 2,098
gholli69 wrote:
However, I personally felt like the meta was going to be melee heavy tank squads with 7-9 activations which looking at several of the other tournaments this year seemed to be the way the meta was leaning.


So you thought the meta was melee heavy tank squads? Why? because that is what you thought people wanted to play. Not what was the best thing to play.
That is a mistake many people are making it seems. That is probably why you saw 2 Vong Squads there as well.

Melee Heavy squads do not win. Has there ever been a melee heavy squad win a gencon/vassalcon? Vader/Sidious got the closest right? mace Windu won it one year right?
You can't have an actual meta unless there is a competitive spirit through the regional season. Which there isn't. Everyone plays Tier 1.5 in regions.
That is why you can't even begin to think about what the true meta is. I love Jabba! I love Jabba because it can beat Thrawn. I think you get rid of Jabba and Thrawn just wins everything again. No doubt about it. The Ultrastar playing Thrawn with Cad Bane and Calo Nord would probably never lose.
Randy
Posted: Tuesday, September 27, 2022 1:26:18 PM
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 2/20/2012
Posts: 159
Cassus fett wrote:
1.) Wasn't Black and Blue forged in the fires of 150? I remember many people saying Thrawn gets worse in 200, or maybe it was just BnB.

Quote:
2009: Deri "fingersandteeth" - Rebel "Cannon" (Lobbin' Luke) (champion) vs Bill "billiv15" - Rebel "Slow Cannon" (runner-up) (Last year using 150pt squads)
2008: Bill "billiv15" - Rebel "Speedy Cannon" (Snowspeeder) (champion) vs Trevor "thereisnotry" Rebel "Boba Fett, Rebel Hero" (runner-up)
2007: Kelly "Dr Divot" - Republic "Broken Boba (BH)" vs "Barzillai" Rebel "Landy Cannon" (Landspeeder) (runner-up)

Thrawn really took off at 200. Since 2012 we have seen 11 Thrawn squads hitting the upper levels based on the following link...

https://boardgamegeek.com/wiki/page/Competitive_Star_Wars_Miniatures_Squads

In 150, Black and Blue was a decent squad. It ended up being Rebels that were dominating the top tables by the end of the WOTC run. B'n'B usually relied on a single attacker and high activations. Rebels were cheap. They could get 2 decent attackers for the same cost, more commanders at the same cost, and with the help of Dodonna a more effective tempo control.
TheHutts
Posted: Tuesday, September 27, 2022 3:05:54 PM
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 6/23/2010
Posts: 3,561
Location: The Hutt, New Zealand
Thrawn got a couple of good tools from the early v-sets too - Morrigan and Pellaeon both gave him access to unavoidable damage, which is crucial when his builds normally only get a few big attacks each round.
Cassus fett
Posted: Tuesday, September 27, 2022 3:37:08 PM
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 6/10/2010
Posts: 749
Location: The Shadowlands of Kashyyyk
Randy wrote:
Cassus fett wrote:
1.) Wasn't Black and Blue forged in the fires of 150? I remember many people saying Thrawn gets worse in 200, or maybe it was just BnB.

Quote:
2009: Deri "fingersandteeth" - Rebel "Cannon" (Lobbin' Luke) (champion) vs Bill "billiv15" - Rebel "Slow Cannon" (runner-up) (Last year using 150pt squads)
2008: Bill "billiv15" - Rebel "Speedy Cannon" (Snowspeeder) (champion) vs Trevor "thereisnotry" Rebel "Boba Fett, Rebel Hero" (runner-up)
2007: Kelly "Dr Divot" - Republic "Broken Boba (BH)" vs "Barzillai" Rebel "Landy Cannon" (Landspeeder) (runner-up)

Thrawn really took off at 200. Since 2012 we have seen 11 Thrawn squads hitting the upper levels based on the following link...

https://boardgamegeek.com/wiki/page/Competitive_Star_Wars_Miniatures_Squads

In 150, Black and Blue was a decent squad. It ended up being Rebels that were dominating the top tables by the end of the WOTC run. B'n'B usually relied on a single attacker and high activations. Rebels were cheap. They could get 2 decent attackers for the same cost, more commanders at the same cost, and with the help of Dodonna a more effective tempo control.


Thanks! I remember Rebels took over by the end of the games’ life (The switch started when Smuggler Han cannon shots became a thing with KotoR right?). But I also remember BnB basically stomping everything between Universe and KotoR especially at 150 (possible bias from my old regional scene but I was also reading the History of the MetaGame article archive NickName wrote back on the wizards forum. Which seems to corroborate my recollections).

Edit: Looking through that list of champions it would appear that rebels and Republic were the top tables basically until V-sets came out. I guess BnB was always the bridesmaid and never the bride.
Udorian84
Posted: Tuesday, September 27, 2022 5:23:29 PM
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 6/6/2021
Posts: 326
I still think Jim's thoughts are the most relevant. Make competitive play be the names we know and love. So I think that whatever can create that atmosphere the most rather it be through design, through balance committee, or through a switch to 150 is what should happen. All that other stuff is not really important now. Once you have the vision of what is important you just take steps toward reaching it. Maybe we should ask what most people enjoy in a skirmish and get a good feel for what we are aiming for. I love playing the game. I try to be competitive but would sacrifice a little to play something I love playing.
DarthMaim
Posted: Tuesday, September 27, 2022 7:29:28 PM
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 7/27/2008
Posts: 1,116
Location: Los Angeles, California
spryguy1981 wrote:
DarkDracul wrote:
I'm hesitant about going back to 150 due to all the years of design work for 200.
However, since we can't get anyone to agree to an activation cap @200 . . . 150 constructed is worth consideration.

Remember the reason we were given for going to 200 constructed?
It was to fit "that" additional attacker or commander players were complaining about running out of points for @150.
Yeah, but that's NOT what those 50 points ended up being spent on . . . they were spammed for 2-point mouse droids.


One idea I had was . . .
You build up to 150pts and then add 1 additional character so long as your build total remains 200pts or under.

So you're forced to spend that 50 points (or more) on a single attacker or commander and not on extra activations.




I am and have always been a big proponent of an activation cap and I really think we need to consider this and have a full merit discussion regarding it. Should we make an entire discussion thread or just continue it here.


Big +1 to activation cap! At my LGS, when we used to play "fun" competition based games once or twice a month, we often capped our games at 10 activations per squad, not allowing reinforcements, reserves, or any abilities that could make your squad increase more than 10. We loved it!

Many years ago, back when I was able to attend GenCon Indy for SWM, my favorite event was the 500pt Epic Constructed event. It was capped at 16 activations, with gambit being a minimum of a 25 pt mini in gambit, to score 25pts. Super fun. I really miss playing this format ThumpUp
Darth_Jim
Posted: Friday, September 30, 2022 7:35:45 PM
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member

Joined: 4/23/2008
Posts: 906
Location: Central Pa
jen'ari wrote:
I love Imperials. I love Vader, I Love Sidious. That is who should own Imperials, not Thrawn. Thrawn should be a good support in the faction. He is cool and powerful.


Despite winning a National Championship with a Thrawn swap squad, I agree with this statement. But... how do we get there?
Users browsing this topic
Guest


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Main Forum RSS : RSS

Bloo Milk Theme Created by shinja
Powered by Yet Another Forum.net.
Copyright © 2003-2006 Yet Another Forum.net. All rights reserved.