Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Okay, so I saw something I considered running for the tournament today, and skipped out on it because I didn't quite agree with the wording and didn't feel like adjusting if I was wrong. Can Chewbacca (the pilot, not the crew member) have "Draw their fire" on him to pull the crits away from his teammate(s) and convert them into normal hits? I decided that no, I wouldn't use this, but I thought I'd get the thoughts of others. I only saw one person answer it on FFG, and they said it was doable. I wanted more thoughts on the matter. Seeing how Chewie requires being "dealt" the card, and DTF says he choose to "take" it, that was my reasoning-he wasn't forced it, he willfully took it. If it IS usable, good lord, my double-YT list is even more obnoxious. If it isn't valid, it stays just as good as it already. I don't lose either way, it's just a question if I end up with a 99 point list that works better than the current 100 point list.

Yes, it works. DTF causes the ship to suffer the uncancelled {crit} result, and to resolve an uncancelled {crit} result you remove a shield or deal a face-up damage card. If Chewbacca is dealt a face-up damage card his pilot ability will trigger and flip it face down without resolving it. The source of the face-up damage card is irrelevant.

Perfect. I'll know for next time then. I felt bad trying it when the guys running the tournament wouldn't know the rules well enough to make a call if it became an issue.

Thought this was a staple of the 'Han and Chewie Super Friends For Ever' list?

Well your paying the points for it and it's legal so no not dirty.

Legal dowsnt necessarily mean "not dirty". I mostly asked because I pay no attention to netlists, and the wording felt a bit off. I appreciate the answers though, because it makes the list far more survivable and nasty, especially after C-3PO hits.

You're thinking like a 40K player. There's nothing in the game so grossly overpowered you should feel bad about running it.

Obviously, playing new or inexperienced players, you might want to take the edge off, but otherwise, go nuts!

I don't know about that. The Tri-Ace Interceptor squad is pretty cheesy. Barrel rolling 45 degrees, boost/roll after attack, three actions on a ship. I smell fromage. I guess XXBB has an easier time of it but still...Just throwin' it out there haha

KnuckleWolf wrote:
I don't know about that. The Tri-Ace Interceptor squad is pretty cheesy. Barrel rolling 45 degrees, boost/roll after attack, three actions on a ship. I smell fromage.

It's also a three-ship list that goes down very quickly if you make any maneuvering mistakes or end up in a situation where you can't get out of arc, and tends to lose badly against turret ships that don't care how many movement actions you get.

@Peregrine: All true, but the first former cases you mention are avoidable, rare, and case specific, and the later is list specific. Our play group is pretty skilled at the flying part of the game. For some idea, three games tonight and only one unintentional self bump, and only a few forced bumps that succeeded. So The Tri-Ace usually is pretty deadly. Gets it's teeth knocked in alot but usually still manages to win in the end game thanks to its maneuverability. Gad I wish Blaster Turret wasn't so clumsy.

KnuckleWolf wrote:
For some idea, three games tonight and only one unintentional self bump, and only a few forced bumps that succeeded.

Sure, but it just takes one bump. If Fel ends up actionless within firing arc of a ship or two then he's probably not going to live to see another turn. A B-wing list, for example, can escape that kind of situation with its raw HP, but an interceptor aces list loses a third of its points every time you make a mistake or get outmaneuvered by a blocking ship. So yeah, it's going to do awesome things when you're out-flying your opponent and your dice don't hate you too badly, but its nonexistent error margin makes it far from cheesy.

And yes, turrets are a list-specific thing. But unless you're list tailoring you have to expect to see them, and taking an interceptor aces list means automatically losing games because they brought YT-1300s.

I dont see how they smell anything like Fromage, Attack dice are favoured over defence dice and if you cant get 1 or 2 of your ships in arc of a ship then thats something the player needs to work on, I know how manoeuvrable Squints are and trust a good player will get in arc, one bad defence roll and there toast.

Far from Cheddar, but very good in the right hands.

One bad roll? They take Hull+Shield and have evade. They can tank a little damage. Trust me, insofar I'm one of the few players to consistently force the buggers into multiple/most arcs, and have yet to just one shot or one turned the bastards. Closest I've gotten was a Soontir down to 1 hull out of three firepower three ships firing at it, in a sneaky move on the initial pass. I counted that a good day. Or have my own Tri-Aces one shot-ed/turned for that matter.

They're also kinda cheesy because for much of the list, even if I do get you pinned in arc inescapably, you have so much choice in your responsive movements it hardly matters as you will get to dictate the range I fire at more often than not and pick up an evade or even better focus/evade. Even if you plan poorly half your move is after that any way, so your bad planning gets a little forgiveness, and my good planning only keeps me on par.

Now am I complaining? No. But in my opinion, against that list you have to pull out your best game, and bring a list that can deal with it. So I rate it there as cheesy. I will also call the list cheesy as it's the only one I've seen yet that players rage quit against. Even watching it play is brutal if your watching someone who can't deal on that level. No debate will change my opinion on it.

KnuckleWolf wrote:
One bad roll? They take Hull+Shield and have evade.

If you lose your action you don't have evade, and if you spend 7 points each on hull + shield then you don't have three interceptor aces in a 100-point list.

Trust me, insofar I'm one of the few players to consistently force the buggers into multiple/most arcs, and have yet to just one shot or one turned the bastards.

Then you just have bad luck. Three dice with no focus/evade have about a 5% chance of rolling all blanks, so about the same odds as rolling a 1 on a D20. I've seen plenty of interceptors killed or crippled because they rolled all/most blanks at a critical moment.

But in my opinion, against that list you have to pull out your best game, and bring a list that can deal with it.

Sure, but the player using the interceptor aces list has to bring their best game or they're going to get out-maneuvered, lose their actions, and watch as 30-40 point ships explode in a single round of shooting.

I will also call the list cheesy as it's the only one I've seen yet that players rage quit against.

"Frustrating when you lose" is not the same thing as cheesy. People get frustrated and ragequit because, unlike other lists, when you're getting out-flown by a better player and losing badly you don't have the illusion of getting to do something. If you're getting crushed by a TIE swarm or dual YT-1300 list you at least get to roll some attack dice and pretend that the damage you're doing is enough to avoid the inevitable outcome, but an aces list doesn't give you that false hope, you just get to roll defense dice and remove ships. It's kind of like the ion spam list, which isn't a very good list overall, but when it wins it does so in a way that most people find incredibly frustrating.

Even watching it play is brutal if your watching someone who can't deal on that level.

How is that any different than watching any other match between players with clearly different skill levels? I've watched plenty of games between "conventional" lists with no fancy maneuvering tricks where one player is clearly getting out-played and making stupid mistakes, and the outcome of the game is completely obvious even if the weaker player gets to roll some dice and pretend to have a chance.

No debate will change my opinion on it.

So what you're saying is that you have no interest in constructive discussion because you already know everything there is to know?

1.) You've assumed they lost their action. And *ahem*

Soontir Fel + Push the Limit + Royal Guard Tie + Hull Upgrade + Shield Upgrade = 37pts
Turr Phennir + Veteran Instincts + Royal Guard Tie + Hull Upgrade + Shield Upgrade = 33pts
Lt. LOL-ir + you get the idea, Royal, hull, shield =30
Grats, its a 100pt list. Unless of course you mean some strange thing by "100%"

2.) Another nice assumption! Still going with the 'lost action' theory I see. If they even roll one evade on each batch of three defense dice, not that difficult, the attacker still needs to have three, firepower three ships, roll their nine dice and only miss two of the rolls to live yet another turn, while pumping out its own three dice at high PS level. Your 'critical moment botch' argument leaves much to be desired tactically.

3.) Greatly disagree, as has already been established a bad plan can be forgiven quite easily with a boost+barrel roll or just one of those in certain circumstances. They don't have to be pros, by any means but as long as they are mid level, the wiggle room provided can be a huge advantage.

4.) Are meta disagrees, frustrating to play against to us constitutes the word 'cheese'. Hence in our play group the list has received that title unanimously. Functional use of language difference. Your opinion has been noted however.

5.) See #4 above. Your illusion comment would seem to apply. Let the lower skill player at least have a chance to roll some attack dice.

6.) Yo dawg, I heard you like assumptions! So you made some assumption to go with your assumptions, so you can assume stuff while your assuming things! Can I get an Amen!? To be honest I would hardly call your commentary 'constructive discussion' most of the time, but I'll overlook that as this latest leap of interpretation has raised a giggle to my mouth on account of it's complete lack of foundation and reason while probing in desperation for a point to attack me and not my argument. I'll give you another chance on this one. Walk me through the logic that can prove that an intelligent being you hardly know from across the net states his opinion is immutable, and you come back with me declaring "I know everything! I don't want to talk about it!"? Or better yet...don't. Seeing as how that starts walking a thin red line on some forum rules, which you/we already have, and quite frankly you can't prove it because it wasn't the case. And besides, it only would serve to highlight your disagreeable nature. I'm going to instead put it to rest. I have examined the information, analyzed my data, heard the opinions of others, and made my decision. It is not outside the realm of discussion, though until a truly new piece of astounding evidence is presented, said discussion won't change it.. And I have not made any claim to superior knowledge. I'm afraid you'll have to be content with that.

KnuckleWolf wrote:
1.) You've assumed they lost their action. And *ahem*

Soontir Fel + Push the Limit + Royal Guard Tie + Hull Upgrade + Shield Upgrade = 37pts
Turr Phennir + Veteran Instincts + Royal Guard Tie + Hull Upgrade + Shield Upgrade = 33pts
Lt. LOL-ir + you get the idea, Royal, hull, shield =30
Grats, its a 100pt list. Unless of course you mean some strange thing by "100%"

No, that was just a typo. 100-point list.

And Lorir is not an elite ace, he's got low PS and no EPT, which means he tends to explode as soon as someone brings PS 6+ ships or a YT-1300. The "imperial aces" list is some combination of Fel/Phennir/Jax/engine upgrade Vader (with APT Rhymer maybe counting since he can blow up a ship in one shot). And you're using VI instead of PTL on Phennir, which means you're sacrificing the one thing that keeps interceptors alive to free up the points for those upgrades. So, if anything, your example list is less "cheesy" (according to your definition of "cheesy") than the standard list because it relies more on HP and tanking hits than the standard glass cannon list that drops all of those useless HP upgrades because it never gets hit.

Still going with the 'lost action' theory I see.

Yes, because lost actions happen occasionally. That's why I said it's a list that's incredibly unforgiving of mistakes or getting out-maneuvered by blocking ships, if you lose your action you probably lose a ship.

If they even roll one evade on each batch of three defense dice, not that difficult, the attacker still needs to have three, firepower three ships, roll their nine dice and only miss two of the rolls to live yet another turn, while pumping out its own three dice at high PS level. Your 'critical moment botch' argument leaves much to be desired tactically.

Unless you don't have points for hull upgrade + shield upgrade on every ship (you don't if you use three "true" aces), or you take a fatal crit (or just one that cripples you next turn for an inevitable death). And even if you do have that extra 2 HP it only delays the problem, it doesn't avoid it entirely. You can and will lose ships occasionally to bad rolls.

3.) Greatly disagree, as has already been established a bad plan can be forgiven quite easily with a boost+barrel roll or just one of those in certain circumstances. They don't have to be pros, by any means but as long as they are mid level, the wiggle room provided can be a huge advantage.

Yes, reactive moves are great. But they aren't an auto-win. Turret ships laugh at them, and there's a limit to how far they can take you, especially if you actually plan to win the game instead of just flying around uselessly until your opponent gets bored and quits.

4.) Are meta disagrees, frustrating to play against to us constitutes the word 'cheese'.

Then you're not using the conventional definition. For everyone else "cheese" has to be overpowered, it's an inherent part of the concept. A list that is frustrating to lose against but doesn't actually win more than average and has clear drawbacks is not a "cheese" list.

Walk me through the logic that can prove that an intelligent being you hardly know from across the net states his opinion is immutable, and you come back with me declaring "I know everything! I don't want to talk about it!"?

It's nice and simple: if you declare that no argument can possibly change your mind then you aren't being a reasonable person. Constructive discussion depends on everyone involved being willing to seriously consider the other side's arguments, not just decide that their opinion is correct no matter what anyone says.

Look at his card, see the red stripes. He's an ACE! Jax is a Guard! He has PTL built in to his pilot ability. Barrel rolls that grant 45 degree angle changes in return for stress. Boost-Roll if you will. Glass cannons are fun, this three ace list is just not as glassy. If you really want PTL back on Turr, go for it, I've seen the list work fine both ways, have a good time. BTW Jax is meh in this list. Too expensive for a ship that just dictates actions in a three ship list, he works more efficiently supporting minor swarms we've found. OH! ioho, almost forgot. Heaven forbid you want to fly off on that tangent.

Let's see,what else...

By the time this list loses actions, generally it's usually already out of arcs of most enemy fighters and the point is moot. Still not a strong enough argument.

Still pushing the turret as a problem, fine, doesn't help your argument against the other non turret ships. Circumstantial points do not a good argument make.

Find a dictionary that has a definitive definition of "Cheese" where in this usage in this context isn't open to some variance and I'll further consider the issue. And considering the win rate this list has pulled, I dare say it IS overpowered and still fits your own usage of the word.

Nice and simple huh? Despite that, you have failed in your understanding. If a individual reaches a decision after having heard the various opinions on an issue, and weighed it against his own experiences, they have made their decision using reason. Once an individual has reached a well reasoned decision, they are under no obligation to reopen consideration without sufficient cause. If they were required to reopen deliberation every time someone else brought up a contradictory opinion, a decision as simple as hot dogs or burgers could be caught in a continual loop. At some point the line is drawn, a decision is made, and remains that way until need requires otherwise. To that point, I read your arguments, the others here as well, those of the locals. I've played games with the list, against the list, and sometimes just watched the games. I have deliberated on all this data, and I have made my reasoned decision. And in dealing with you so help me God I have been more reasonable than I probably should have. I've stated my opinion, my decision to be sure. Done so such that all concerned would know that I was not interested in it's debate, only in sharing it so that they could have it as a data point in their own reasoning.

Constructive discussion depends on everyone involved being willing to seriously consider the other side's arguments, not just decide that their opinion is correct no matter what anyone says.

I could have written the same thing addressed to you and it would have only then been aimed at the most needing individual. I have considered your arguments, but I wager you have not fully considered mine. And I doubt in the extreme if there is anyone in this forum who you do consider the arguments of. But that's all irrelevant and off topic. I'm done. Said my piece. Made my peace. Now that I've got all that out I won't return to this subject. I'm moving on

KnuckleWolf wrote:
By the time this list loses actions, generally it's usually already out of arcs of most enemy fighters and the point is moot. Still not a strong enough argument.

Does nobody in your area know how to block? If you're throwing an ORS/academy pilot/etc in the target ship's path then you know where it's going to be, and you can aim all of your other ships at the spot where it's going to land.

Still pushing the turret as a problem, fine, doesn't help your argument against the other non turret ships. Circumstantial points do not a good argument make.

It proves the point that the list isn't "cheesy". When you pretty much auto-lose against a variety of common lists then no, it's not a "cheesy" list.

Find a dictionary that has a definitive definition of "Cheese" where in this usage in this context isn't open to some variance and I'll further consider the issue.

There is no dictionary definition because the dictionary doesn't cover such a niche hobby. But in a gaming context "cheesy" requires that the thing in question be overpowered. You know, since that's what "cheesy" means: "something that is so overpowered and easy to win with that it's bad manners to use it".

And considering the win rate this list has pulled, I dare say it IS overpowered and still fits your own usage of the word.

What win rate? Check the results from the recent store championships: http://community.fantasyflightgames.com/index.php?/topic/100813-store-championship-results/

Notice that the dominant lists are TIE swarms, 4-ship X/B-wing lists, and YT-1300s. Interceptors are hardly winning, and 3x elite interceptors is almost nonexistent in the results. It seems pretty clear that the problem here is a few people in your local area having trouble with a list, not how "cheesy" the list is.