SWMGAMERS.com Forums :: View topic

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.

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.

The game should not just be about rushing in to engage your opponent or there would be a lot of useless minis.

Thus the reason for alternate forms of play like royal rumble which I get the idea that you would really like Dennis.

Weeks wrote:

Whoa, hang on. No particular player is being called out. It just so happened that what spurned this discussion was Brad's mention of his game against Tim and the elements that tied into a related topic of which the three of us (and others) were discussing. I'm kind of surprised by your comments here as you have been one of the advocates for some of the most fundamental changes in the last 3 sets (including V-set 4). There's a figure you proposed that is going to completely shake up things in a way that negates alot of the points you are making here.

The strategy of running 20+ acts wins because it outlasts exponentially as the game proceeds. Are you saying you think anyone who runs less than 20 acts deserves to lose or at the very least should expect to? Why should one strategy be superior over all the others to the point of auto loss? I don't think that it should. I'm not saying a poorly built 6-act squad should be able to run the table, but a well-built one by a skilled player deserves the chance to hold its own. The creed of "he who starts with the most figures wins" is a bit bothersome to me.

sthlrd2 wrote:

The game should not just be about rushing in to engage your opponent or there would be a lot of useless minis.

But isn't that exactly what we are talking about? I wait you out because I have more acts than you, and then I rush in to engage and then hastily retreat before you can respond. In the process I make things even more difficult for you because A)I have a points lead that I can sit on, and B)I remove any chance you have of competing because the weakest, lowest point cost figures on your squad were the only available options for utility. So it's not that a high-act squad doesn't rush in, it just does so in a way that allows it to do so without any risk of the other squad interacting in the game.

Quote:

Thus the reason for alternate forms of play like royal rumble which I get the idea that you would really like Dennis.

I like the skirmish game well enough, too.

There's also the fact that you're pretty much putting your eggs into the Mace basket, and if he doesn't get the crits when you need them you can find yourself without him sooner than you'd expect, and then your damage output takes a nosedive.

Echo wrote:

To get this back on topic: Eggs all in one basket my ass

. Has anyone bothered to do the math on Brianna?? She puts just as much out per round as mace, with only slightly lower defense.

I don't play Mace for the Crits...if I did that I'd drop Gowk and go with crit based CE's.

Mace has the best Republic Defense AND has a Reflect to help him advance without taking a stray shot or two. He puts out 60 on the move and I know damn well he'll be around to put out another 60 in the next round.

Ask Audri, I based her full hp Mira knowing full well I would get attacked for the full round. The moment I based her, Audri knew it was game over. It just so happened that in that round I didn't need to wait for another...

If you play Mace hoping for a crit or even thinking about the possibility of one, you're a fool. Play for 60 (like the NFL motto).

Author:	sthlrd2 [ Wed Feb 01, 2012 6:55 am ]
Post subject:	Re: LeGOWKcy
Weeks wrote: 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. Agreed. SWM is a strategy based game with aspects of luck. Luck is always going to be part of the game but you are always trying to increase your chances that is why there are c.e. that grant bonuses to atk and extra atk. If you were supposed to rely on luck then those ce wouldn't exist. There are a ton of valid stratagys in this game, outactivate/with door control, swap, muscle, Bastilla, etc... The game should not just be about rushing in to engage your opponent or there would be a lot of useless minis. If I rush you with my low hp, high activation squad against your high hp big muscle squad then thats not ginging me the best chance to win. Thus the reason for alternate forms of play like royal rumble which I get the idea that you would really like Dennis.

Author:	The_Celestial_Warrior [ Wed Feb 01, 2012 7:08 am ]
Post subject:	Re: LeGOWKcy
Weeks wrote: 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. Foul wasn't legal yet. I've been considering it, just not sure I would have liked it. In Tim's defense....has anyone noticed I said the score was 10-9....my favor. I still had my uggie out on the table....well within range to blow that first door....

Author:	Echo [ Wed Feb 01, 2012 9:21 am ]
Post subject:	Re: LeGOWKcy
I was considering writing out a post to respond to some of the back-and-forth earlier in this thread, but instead of getting dragged into that I'll just give a really big "+1" to pretty much everything Tim said. Well put. The squad is quite good, but definitely has some bad, bad matchups. Any kind of speeder squad (or Lancers) would beat it quite handily, by just never letting you get to it. It also would have a good bit of trouble against Vong, since they would steal GOWK's CE to essentially negate yours and then a few Jedi Hunters could kill Mace and then GOWK relatively easily. Ysalimiri squads give it trouble for basically the same reason; GOWK's effectiveness as a beatstick goes way down when you can't reroll SSM. For really low activation squads like this I think you really need movement to get to where you're going, and this squad doesn't quite have enough. Mace is relatively fast, and you have R2, but R2 will die quickly since your opponent can set up shots at their leisure after you're done activating, and if Mace runs too far ahead he loses GOWK's CE, which cuts into his effectiveness. There's also the fact that you're pretty much putting your eggs into the Mace basket, and if he doesn't get the crits when you need them you can find yourself without him sooner than you'd expect, and then your damage output takes a nosedive. All that without even mentioning the door control problems, and I think one Ugnaught and R2 is just plain not enough of it. Overall it's a solid beef squad, and I think it could beat most other beef squads and basically become the standard rock squad, but even a little bit of tech can take it out.

Author:	Grand Moff Boris [ Wed Feb 01, 2012 9:25 am ]
Post subject:	Re: LeGOWKcy
Weeks wrote: 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. Whoa, hang on. No particular player is being called out. It just so happened that what spurned this discussion was Brad's mention of his game against Tim and the elements that tied into a related topic of which the three of us (and others) were discussing. I'm kind of surprised by your comments here as you have been one of the advocates for some of the most fundamental changes in the last 3 sets (including V-set 4). There's a figure you proposed that is going to completely shake up things in a way that negates alot of the points you are making here. The strategy of running 20+ acts wins because it outlasts exponentially as the game proceeds. Are you saying you think anyone who runs less than 20 acts deserves to lose or at the very least should expect to? Why should one strategy be superior over all the others to the point of auto loss? I don't think that it should. I'm not saying a poorly built 6-act squad should be able to run the table, but a well-built one by a skilled player deserves the chance to hold its own. The creed of "he who starts with the most figures wins" is a bit bothersome to me. sthlrd2 wrote: The game should not just be about rushing in to engage your opponent or there would be a lot of useless minis. But isn't that exactly what we are talking about? I wait you out because I have more acts than you, and then I rush in to engage and then hastily retreat before you can respond. In the process I make things even more difficult for you because A)I have a points lead that I can sit on, and B)I remove any chance you have of competing because the weakest, lowest point cost figures on your squad were the only available options for utility. So it's not that a high-act squad doesn't rush in, it just does so in a way that allows it to do so without any risk of the other squad interacting in the game. Quote: Thus the reason for alternate forms of play like royal rumble which I get the idea that you would really like Dennis. I like the skirmish game well enough, too.

Author:	thereisnotry [ Wed Feb 01, 2012 10:19 am ]
Post subject:	Re: LeGOWKcy
I despise the high-activation tempo-control nonsense that seems to dominate the top-tier meta. It's one of the reasons why I enjoy the 500pt Epic SWM format so much: there's an activation cap. And properly executed (IMHO) that format doesn't allow tempo control pieces either (because they ruin the point of the activation cap). I'm not sure if or how much Wuher and Tyber will change the high-activation/tempo control nonsense, but for the last few years the top-tier meta has remained largely the same: a squad must have either tempo control (or a way to counter it) or a mass-activation killer, or else it can't compete at the highest level. I have dozens of squads that do not meet the above criteria, and I really enjoy playing them...I just know that I can't use them in a competitive tournament. I look forward to the day when the current meta breathes its last, but until then, I won't disparage someone who plays a squad that can compete at the top level.

SWMGAMERS.com Forums https://www.swmgamers.com/forums/

LeGOWKcy https://www.swmgamers.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=15036	Page 2 of 2

Author:	TimmerB123 [ Wed Feb 01, 2012 10:28 am ]
Post subject:	Re: LeGOWKcy
Grand Moff Boris wrote: Weeks wrote: 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. Whoa, hang on. No particular player is being called out. It just so happened that what spurned this discussion was Brad's mention of his game against Tim and the elements that tied into a related topic of which the three of us (and others) were discussing. I'm kind of surprised by your comments here as you have been one of the advocates for some of the most fundamental changes in the last 3 sets (including V-set 4). There's a figure you proposed that is going to completely shake up things in a way that negates alot of the points you are making here. The strategy of running 20+ acts wins because it outlasts exponentially as the game proceeds. Are you saying you think anyone who runs less than 20 acts deserves to lose or at the very least should expect to? Why should one strategy be superior over all the others to the point of auto loss? I don't think that it should. I'm not saying a poorly built 6-act squad should be able to run the table, but a well-built one by a skilled player deserves the chance to hold its own. The creed of "he who starts with the most figures wins" is a bit bothersome to me. sthlrd2 wrote: The game should not just be about rushing in to engage your opponent or there would be a lot of useless minis. But isn't that exactly what we are talking about? I wait you out because I have more acts than you, and then I rush in to engage and then hastily retreat before you can respond. In the process I make things even more difficult for you because A)I have a points lead that I can sit on, and B)I remove any chance you have of competing because the weakest, lowest point cost figures on your squad were the only available options for utility. So it's not that a high-act squad doesn't rush in, it just does so in a way that allows it to do so without any risk of the other squad interacting in the game. Quote: Thus the reason for alternate forms of play like royal rumble which I get the idea that you would really like Dennis. I like the skirmish game well enough, too. For what it's worth my squad had 12 activations (and I usually brought in 2-4 more). That's not that crazy. And if you look at last year's GenCon top 8, it wasn't the very high activation squads that made it. Only one lancer squad made it, and it has under 20 activations. Of course several Yodabucks and Anakin solos made it, which take care of tons of small pieces in one turn. There was one very high activation squad that just missed by placing 9th. My point is this - it is a tough strategy, but not unbeatable. Clearly proven by last years results. Much higher activation counts were present the year before, especially in the 1st and second place squads of Brandon Pyle and Daniel Stephens. Brandon DEFINITELY had the "out-activate then smash" sort of squad. I am not disparaging it, it was a smart squad for that meta played well. Anyway - this is how the Meta is played. You figure out a strategy (whatever legal strategy), and try and beat the other player. I play plenty of other "fun" games. Games where we make up different goofy rules. Games where you are forced to prioritize different things. One of the things I love about minis is how many infinite possibilities there are. But anyone that goes to a competitive tournament has to be prepared to lose. Sometimes in a manner of which it feels like their getting spanked, often since they can't even attack them back. And if losing is not fun for them, then they either need to build a better squad and/or play better - or maybe they shouldn't play in competitive tournaments. Stick to the house games where you can make whatever rules you want. I still remember my game vs Shinja 3 years ago in the World Championship. It ended like 5-15. It was like a tense chess match the whole time. He won because he had a sound strategy and a team build to beat mine. He impressed me. I didn't complain because he wouldn't let me engage - he outplayed me. He earned the win. It was frustrating, but really I was mad with myself, not him or his play style. Forcing your opponent to play YOUR game has always been, and will always be a major part of STM. When you have a brute force squad - getting in their face and tearing them up is YOUR game. So of course the opponent is going to try and avoid that. That's how the game works.

Author:	Echo [ Wed Feb 01, 2012 11:54 am ]
Post subject:	Re: LeGOWKcy
The_Celestial_Warrior wrote: Echo wrote: There's also the fact that you're pretty much putting your eggs into the Mace basket, and if he doesn't get the crits when you need them you can find yourself without him sooner than you'd expect, and then your damage output takes a nosedive. To get this back on topic: Eggs all in one basket my ass . Has anyone bothered to do the math on Brianna?? She puts just as much out per round as mace, with only slightly lower defense. She puts out as much as Mace when A) she's adjacent, which could very quickly lead to a dead Brianna and when B) Mace isn't getting crits, which is kind of the exact opposite of what you want to happen. With Mace you can reliable do 140+ damage per round (40 from GOWK, 60 from Mace, 40 from Brianna shooting) with a likelihood of much more (crits from Mace and getting adjacent with Brianna, or having Atris come out and fight). Without Mace you're looking at an absolute max of 140 (40 from GOWK, 40 from Atris using Double, 60 from Brianna when adjacent), and you're only getting that because you aren't doing other good things (meditating with Atris, shooting with Brianna). Yeah, there's still potential for enough damage there, to the point that if you trade Mace for lots of your opponents stuff you can easily clean up with the rest, but losing Mace earlier than you want can mean playing catch-up on damage output the rest of the game.

Author:	thereisnotry [ Wed Feb 01, 2012 1:12 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: LeGOWKcy
The_Celestial_Warrior wrote: I don't play Mace for the Crits...if I did that I'd drop Gowk and go with crit based CE's. Mace has the best Republic Defense AND has a Reflect to help him advance without taking a stray shot or two. He puts out 60 on the move and I know damn well he'll be around to put out another 60 in the next round. Ask Audri, I based her full hp Mira knowing full well I would get attacked for the full round. The moment I based her, Audri knew it was game over. It just so happened that in that round I didn't need to wait for another... If you play Mace hoping for a crit or even thinking about the possibility of one, you're a fool. Play for 60 (like the NFL motto). Agreed...play for 60...but be prepared for more. That is, whenever possible, place Mace adjacent to more than 1 enemy character, on the off chance that he does go on a critting spree. One lucky crit (followed by a well-placed flurry) can often win the game immediately--I've seen it happen more than once. But you're right: don't bank on the crit...60dmg on the move from a hard-to-hit beatstick (effectively 34 Defense in cover with Meditation on) is plenty good.

Page 2 of 2	All times are UTC - 6 hours
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/