Cybit wrote:
Between games of equal level players (or close), it usually comes down to a key init roll. As far as I know, this hasn't changed since the very beginning of SWM. Why would this change now? Do hate squads for Tier 1 squads normally not need the key initiative or two to win, assuming player skill is equal (honest question)?
I often challenge this position, because the situation required for it does not exist generally. Almost always, there are plenty of factors that help determine an outcome, well before that final init. I rarely, if ever, even when playing against good equal level opponents have games come down to a final init. In fact, generally the only times it does so, I have screwed up something or multiple things earlier.
Point of fact. My three closes games at Gencon in 2008 were against Lou, Matt Hansen and of course MtMagus who I lost to in Swiss. In Magus' game, I lost in 15 minutes. In Lou's game, it came down to the wire, but it wasn't init that won it, it was my last attack piece hitting and his missing. In my game with Matt Hansen, init had little to do with it at the end (I had lost a key one earlier, and then was saved by some missed attacks). I won by a clever ruse.
Cybit wrote:
Yes, but if that's a Speedy Cannon squad that makes those mistakes, does he still pull out the win based on squad strength.
Perhaps not those specific mistakes against that meta, but in another meta, sure it would have. I've pointed this out many times. Matt went 1-3, 2-2, 2-2, 1-3 in the four tournaments he ran speedy cannon before Gencon. He then went 7-0 in swiss, and 8-1 overall for 3rd place. Even in the case of GOWK, I am not arguing that the best players aren't going to win. I am arguing the opposite actually. I think the meta is even easier to beat now, than it has ever been. As a top player, my choice of squad is simple. I play GOWK, and if I play it better than everyone else, and the dice don't fail me, I will win Gencon again this year.
Cybit wrote:
Part of a squad's strength is its' ability to recover from mistakes. GOWK can sometimes get away completely after being left in the open. Rex/Dash, not so much. GOWK has put big shooter squads on the sideline, so melee bands are starting to come back out.
I disagree. An ability to recover only matters if you make major mistakes to begin with. Generally speaking, squads that spend points on defensive abilities that allow them to "recover" are not as strong as those that can go without. Its not necessarily a huge difference, but recovery isn't a significant factor in most games at the top levels, or at least not based on the squad itself. Its the player that can recover a "lost" game, not the squad in most cases.
I've done it two years in a row, come back from a 1-2nd round disintegration to win the game. 2007, it was Han Scoundrel, in 2008 is was my Speeder.
Cybit wrote:
Why doesn't Malak run into the same problem that he did pre GOWK, ie, things with a gun start blasting him to kingdom come?
Actually, Ben's been running that squad for a while now, and he adapts it to the current meta. It wasn't a true "GOWK counter" at all. He would run it against anything, and count on playing better than you to win. IT's a squad that very much fits his playstyle, even if it isn't optimized.
Cybit wrote:
But one thing I've noticed about SWM is that once we think we have the meta figured out, something usually shows up that most didn't see coming, and forces a shift. So I'm content to sit back and wait for a couple of months after JA.
That has not been my experience generally. I think we do tend to "find" most everything. There are times when a given build does better than expected, but it's rarely all that surprising. I think the closest example I can think of is the Landspeeder at Gencon 07. A lot of people were surprised by it, but I know Matt and I had tested with it and against it, so it wasn't a shocker to us. Other than that, I don't remember there being a major shocker.
Cybit wrote:
It is really interesting that Bill dropped Dodonna, and maybe it has something to do with our meta, but I think many people would agree that the huge disadvantage Mandalorians have is Dodonna going "haha, no opportunist for you scouts!". I actually like San Hill/Ozzel, because they force a trade-off. Dodonna really doesn't. It's just completely unnecessary power creep to me.
Well, I have explained it in the past, but I think it illuminates something here, so I'll do it again. Think of my statement above, where I mentioned that the ability to recover wasn't completely necessary for a squad to be great.
So we have two SCs, one with Dodonna, and one with a Human BG.
Dodonna allows the ability to outactivate, react, and ultimately, to be able to recover better. I agree, it does all of those things quite well. For example when playing against San Hill, without Dodonna, a placement mistake will cost you a key figure, and you won't be able to react once you are activated out.
The HBG on the other hand, not only covered me for Disintegration, it allowed me to spread damage around, and keep my key pieces alive that extra round, which meant I was doing more damage than the Dodonna squad in general, provided I didn't make the early phase placement mistakes mentioned above.
In addition, if I am capable of playing it just as well without Dodonna, it would be silly of me to not use that space for the extra help that a BG brings.
So in terms of overall strength, my squad, when played by me (or MtMagus) was stronger than the Dodonna variant played by Robin at Pax, but it was also less forgivable to mistakes. I take that trade off, and try to play perfectly if I can in most cases. I played numerous games against opposing Dodonnas and Sans (don't think I played an Ozzel last year), and I won all of them. I simply apply most of the strategies I've talked about over the years and in my articles and played my best games.
So take that for what it's worth. I know Robin said he didn't think he could win without Dodonna for the PAX meta (which had Mando Scouts legal) and that's a fair decision. Different players will have different strengths and different results with the same exact stuff. It happens all the time. It's what makes this prediction stuff so difficult. I won Gencon with Speedy Cannon, but outside of Matt and I, would another player have won with it, if we weren't there? Would that same player have been better off with Dodonna?
Cybit wrote:
Yes, but to the uninitiated/naive, all I see are (most) people re-confirming their own opinions they had before the tournaments started.
[/quote][/quote]Hard to change your mind when you are right to begin with
(that's a joke btw). I'm being as objective as possible, but recognizing that it's an impossibility to be so in truth. I believe the reality shows that we are being proven right, as more and more people are coming over to the ban side. I don't think that's a coincidence, I think it's based on people seeing the merit in what we are saying, and seeing it for themselves in practice.