General Obi-Wan Kenobi
Mace Windu, Legacy of the Light Side
Atris
Brianna
R2D2 Astromech Droid
Ugnaught.

Ran this at Lansing and took second. I think this is an upgrade to Lou's tank squad as it adds an offensive boost. Mace puts out a garaunteed 60 per round and is garaunteed to be there the next round for another 60.

You have to play it very aggressively, but sometimes people forget that's how the game is meant to be played.

This squad looks really tight i really like it, and very strong. out of curiosity what map did you choose to play on

Cargo Docks

Perfect.

I have to give ya mad props on this one. I was this squads third round kill and the game was over on Round 2 phase 2 when Mira was slammed for 80. Once Mira died I just offered concession... not much of a chance with two JWMs vs GOWK and CRITDU.

Ha, I love it. It's crazy, but I love it!

Forget activations...just send two invincible tanks up in their faces and let them scramble! GOWK never dies, and Mace never stops killing stuff...and he has a 30 Def (34 in cover!) with the CE and Atris' Meditation.

Cool squad dude. What beat you?

You know me. I beat myself. Tim played a speeder squad and wouldn't let me engage so I just conceded.

I also lost every map roll save 1 and this wasn't the one, so that didn't help. It was on Throne room.

In all honesty, it was 9-10 when I conceded r2 vs 2 rounds of gambit, but Brianna would have been next at some point so then I would have had to try to speed the game up to grab 6 more rounds of gambit....why play that?

Initially, I was kind of surprised when you did this. I always think of JWM's as having a lot of beef but on the way home I started crunching the numbers and realized it made sense.

The JWM's would have needed 19's to hit Mace and 15's to hit GOWK, with Riposte and SSM's behind any hit.

Mace needed 2's even with Duelist.

Why did you choose Brianna? My first instincts would have been a vanilla Echani, or maybe Ferus Olin. I think she's very good, but I was wondering what made you choose her?

After GOWK, Mace, R2, and Atris....I had 30 points left.

You couldn't ignore the speeder and just chase down everything else?

I'm guessing the minimal door control was a problem on that map. (Throne Room)

Pretty much. I could have stayed in gambit while he locked all the doors and suffered through rounf after round of strafe...or I could have left gambit, ran around the map just in time to have him lock the other doors....why bother playing if I can't roll my dice.

I'm noting the irony of Tim bitching about games going to time now that GOWK is back and then intentionally fielding a run-down-the-clock squad. Who's really running the game to time if you cannot engage his forces? Par for the course.

Actually Tim would have had 9 points from his other three games. I think I could have played him to time easily in this game....but the only dice I would get to roll would be for SSM....how boring for me.

I did the same thing with Weeks at Gencon...I miscounted squares so he was able to shut off Bastila....from there on out it was gallop, swap, gallop swap....why bother to play that(against that)? So I gave him the game....it's a valid tactic that is really boring for the other player. I come to play, not sit there while the other guy wins....

Understood, but not really the point. Go back and read Tim's comments in the other thread. His complaint was that a player could SSM his/her way to victory now that it works for all attacks. But what really happened when he was faced with it in a tournament? He fielded a squad that drug the game out, potentially. Sure the squad was tough enough against other opponents, but I'd guarantee you based on my observations of the way he plays that he probably did the same thing against those opponents and then either manipulated the outcome to make them give up (like you did), or beat them by tempo'ing out and then coming in with the speeder until he had a points lead he could sit on.

Nothing against Tim personally, but I really don't care for his style of play. I think it is unsportsmanlike and not in the spirit of the game. I could shrug my shoulders except he doesn't hold back his own opinions when elements created/adjusted interfere with that style preference.

Well I guess I have to chime in here.

First of all - I don't understand why anyone would think it's a squad to prolong games. It has a ton of firepower and can kill many characters at once. The Speeder does 60 damage to each character it strafes with opportunist and twin, and another 60 to 1 more target. The Storm Commando can do 120 damage and Weir can do 120 damage himself. That's not even counting the double attacking commaders and other fodder that do their own part. Three minis that can all lay out 120 damage each to any single piece is no slouch. It's is a tough squad (not teir 1, but maybe 1.5) in no way meant to prolong games, but rather to dispatch masses of enemies quickly. I think I killed all of Eric Larson's squad in the final round of the tournament in 4 rounds.

I admit I am competitive. I like to win in a competitive tournament. In a tournament in 3/2 scoring - in order to do that you need to get 3 point wins. It doesn't make ANY sense to build a squad that you can't get 3 point wins with, much less TRY to prolong games.

On the contrary, since I LIKE to win, after the advent of 3/2 scoring I have been actively seeking squads that CAN get the 3 point win. That CAN finish games in time. I can't tell you how many times I have had discussions with Jake, Deri, Jason, Eric and others about if a squad can regularly get 3 pt wins. On if it can play fast enough. I am VERY conscious of it. And to try to do the opposite make NO SENSE.

Secondly - Dennis, you are completely wrong in the point I was making about SSM. YOU should go back and read the thread where is was talking about SSM. You said this:



When actually what I said was this:



and



Pretty big difference. Luckily - it's quite easy to quote things in these threads to prove you wrong.

It really makes you look foolish when you say that I was making a certain point when in fact I was making an entirely different point.


Thirdly - and I'm surprised this wasn't mentioned by Brad - we did play on after he conceded. I told him I wouldn't lock the door after he conceded, that I would rather actually play then just take a win and sit there. So we did play on, and we engaged, and we both attacked, and we both probably made silly errors we wouldn't have otherwise. In the end his SSM saves weren't great, and I ended up killing off all his squad but Atris with 15 minutes left to go and he called it for good. So we did play it out, and it did finish in under time. My swapping allowed me to stay away from his beatsicks enough to take them down. Mace first obviously. It was a tech heavy squad vs a brute force squad. Of course you have to use your tech to win. That's why you have tech. It's unfair to say, well you shouldn't use your tech so we can engage - unless the other guy is willing to not use his brute force (somehow). YES, I'm gonna swap my fragile big shooter out of there, that why I paid the points for the swap mechanic. YES, I'm gonna outactive then pound you, that's why I paid points for all those activations. YES I am going first and I'm going to strafe you again, that's why I paid those points for master tactician.

Brad is a good player, and he knows the game well. He saw what was going to happen in the game when he conceded. It was legal and fair, it just wasn't gonna be fun for him. Can't blame him there. After we played it out, I won AND it was more fun.


Lastly - it's just rude to say things like my style of play is unsportsmanlike. Especially after saying "nothing against Tim personally", and then saying something against me personally. Look - I am sorry I beat your friends in competitive tournaments. I am sorry it was sometimes in a frustrating manner. I get frustrated too when people outsmart me. Oh crap, they killed my override and now I have an uphill battle. Guess what? That means they played better. They played smarter. They brought a team that could handle mine. It is frustrating, but I don't allude that they cheated, or they were unsportsmanlike, or they weren't playing in the spirit of the game. I just say they beat me.

Star Wars Miniatures is a strategy game. If you do anything within the rules help you win, then you are using good STRATEGY. To me, the "spirit of the game" (which is the vague catch phrase you love to throw out there but never acutely define), is finding the best strategy to win. Building a team around that strategy, and actively applying that strategy. If someone doesn't allow me to do my strategy, then that means their strategy is BETTER. I don't whine that they didn't let me attack. If I didn't attack it's because they out-smarted me. Note what I WAS bitching about with SSM - it's about LUCK prolonging games, not skill. Luck of save rolls with SSM is a huge factor. I try to lessen the element of luck in the game, not increase it. For someone who was so opposed to Disintegration, I am surprised you'd like an ability like SSM in which save rolls come into play so much.

Anyway - Dennis, frankly I am sick and tired of you calling to question my integrity as a gamer. Go be jealous somewhere else - I just want to play the game. And unlike some other people, I still want to play it competitively. I will still play in several tournaments at GenCon. I am active in the competitive meta of SWM. Not just theoretically.

When was the last time you even played me? If you ever want to play a game with me on vassal - I'd love to. Sincerely - a friendly game. I really like this game. I think I can show you that I don't actually play like you think I do. I truly think you have this false image in you head that is unfair. You can even make the rules. No override? Sure - no problem. I really don't want to fight with you, I just want to have fun playing the game I love. Why are you trying to prevent that?

I'm not going to go paragraph by paragraph in a response nor do I have the time to go back through 3 or 4 different message boards to find it, but I'm sure that I and others have defined the spirit of the game. You could search any GOWK thread back when it was talked about being banned during the WotC era.

I will define it here, just to be clear though. The spirit of the game is active engagement between both players. It is not to sit back with twice as many activations as your opponent while you (the generic you, not you specifically) wait for them to "tap out" and then run out to knock out their support and leave them in a position where they are unable to do anything.

Secondly, my comment was not an attack on you or your integrity. I may have worded it awkwardly, I admit. Note also that I said I think the style of play is unsportsmanlike, not that you are. Yes, by the technical definition it is legal play but it is not really in the spirit of playing the game. That is just my opinion and it is fine to disagree. Games where you watch your opponent make all the actions are boring. I've been in the same position Brad described more than once. I think one reason that squads like yours do well is - (partly, I am by no means dismissing play skill) because they manipulate the technicalities of the game. It's a paper squad that can beat scissors and rock because it exploits the weaknesses of both of those concepts. If everyone ran the exact same style of squad, I could almost guarantee every game would go to time or hit the 5-round limit.

I chuckled as I scanned through your retaliatory comments about you "beating my friends." I'm not sure what that is referring to. The only person I have seen you play that I am friends with that I can think of is Jason, and he has never said anything bad to me about that game. My comments have next to nothing to do with that and everything to do with every other game I have seen you play or read about in various tournament reports. I have no problem with you winning, as obviously you are a capable player, so again it was not personal. I'm not sure what it is I am jealous about, either. If I am jealous of someone who repeatedly wins at a game, then I have bigger issues. I assure you I am not "jealous."

Moving on, I read the quoted portions of your comments from the SSM thread and I still garnered the same interpretation from it. You allude to the notion of making "72 attacks" that can force the game to go to time. How many attacks does your opponent get to make in that same period? I'm guessing none. Chalk that up to "whining" if it makes you feel better, but it's an actual concern for me.

Finally, you state that you think SSM for all attacks lets the mediocre players hang with the skilled ones. To that I say, good! Let's face it. The game is stagnating right now, and it gets worse as more time passes. The "mediocre players" have left because WotC no longer supports it. Hell, a lot of the skilled players have left too. If SSM keeps some of those people playing the game, then that's a good thing in my opinion. Sorry if the luck factor makes it tougher for some of the better/more experienced players who would rather their opponent find themselves outnumbered and unable to interact in the game on the start of round 2, but it's a worthwhile trade-off if it keeps the number of people playing a little higher. SWM is a luck based game and always has been. I do hate Disintegration, but it's part of the game and I have been on both sides of the outcome of it.

I haven't been on Vassal in a long time, but I appreciate the offer to play a game. I'll take you up on that one afternoon sometime.

Bottom line is. If you play one uggie and r2 as your only door control, and only have 6 activations then ya, I'd expect a player with door control and swap would beat you. I really like brads squad mind you, it's a beat em up rush squad.

If your tired of getting beat by override you can always play more door control. No one forces anyone to play the squads they choose to play. If you run very few acts and 2 door control pieces then you should be prepared for someone to run a squad that kills your door control and locks you out. By playing competitively your trying to get wins, so don't call out a person or strategy just because it wins.

As far as the squad goes. I think Foul would be better then Brianna he would give you another movement breaker so you can afford to lose r2 and you can also run 2 more uggies.