The opponent can't really work against Mace's variability. You can't affect someone else's dice. On the other hand, you can try to work against Mara's somewhat by activating your biggest targets first to negate Cunning.

Mace's variability could be a problem in competitive play because at something like GenCon you need to win repeatedly. It's easier for Mace to have a 'bad' rolling game because he needs the crits so much. Regular hits aren't enough. Also, while Mace has average output similar to Lord Vader, his variability means more damage will be wasted. His average output (about 120dmg) includes the ability to sometimes go off for 200, 300, or 400 damage. That's wasted damage output. While it's fun and memorable when it happens, it's more useful to have damage output like Lord Vader (w/Opportunist) where he also averages about 120, but he gets that much far more often. Seldom will he do 60 or less and he will never do 300dmg.

Okay, so I've read pages and pages of flame-war and have finally decided that nothing will be accomplished here. This is a classic case of "fanboys v. Realists". The realists don't seem to be in the lead much because the fanboys will say, "Oh, just use Nobles." or "If you can't beat him you're a n00bsauce and play with bad people".

Well screw that. You folks act like SWM is this huge game, where if we play with sub-par players, we can just migrate to a different group.

The fact of the matter is that SWM is dying, as it has been since WotC dropped it. And the pockets of players that survived need to band together. This discussion, nay, argument, is tearing us apart!

So, I have decided to fix the screw-up of whoever decided to make this piece. My game group (which consists of DuCard90 and Greybird) will just alter the piece to fit out liking. We aren't tournament players. We get together once a week at the local library and play. We play to, well, play! We're not in it to have "the ultimate team to crush all who oppose us", because we've discovered that that kind of gameplay ruins SWM; and it's unfortunate that the V-Set designed have make Tournament play a higher priority than keeping the game alive.

(Again, being a realist. If there weren't a screw up, there wouldn't be an 8-page discussion on it. Clearly, some of us feel that he is a broken, overpowered piece, and if this debate didn't open up the eyes of the V-Set designers, then nothing will. And that saddens me.)

There's my 2-cents on this debacle. If you don't like it - too blasted bad. I've gotten ill of the "Well, Mace won/lost this one battle so clearly he isn't broken, and if you disagree with me you're an idiot" back-and-forth. That's getting us nowhere.

Have it it, fanboys!

Yeah, so mine is full of all of the above, and mine alone? Read of some of the slander that's been put out there.

1. If you are playing casual games to have fun, do that. Do whatever is fun. It's not fun to play a swarm versus Lancer or Yobuck. Don't do it. It's not fun to play Bastila versus a squad that is 100% dependent on commander effects. Don't do it. It's not fun to play Mace Legacy versus a squad dependent on one single big beatstick. Don't do it. If you think Mace himself makes the game not-fun, don't play with him. If you think he just needs a slight tweak, feel free to do that for fun games. Know what? I think having more than 5 or 6 Mouse Droids in a squad is patently un-fun. I don't play that way.

2. If you think he's broken and overpowered, go to Vassal and take up the challenge that was put out several pages ago. Go beat someone with Mace and convince others that he's broken, or lose with him and thereby learn how to beat him. The realist performs experiments and finds out if their hypothesis stands up in the face of new data. The design team is open to the possibility of Mace being broken - you just have to prove it.

3. This debate brought up several counters to Mace: nobles, shooters, Vong, and swarms (of certain types). One of those counters (boosted Vong Jedi Hunters) would probably be an auto-loss for Mace. So I don't see any basis for you saying that this debate shows that the piece is broken. This debate has overall been a good discussion, and the fact that there are still people in at least 3 different camps on Mace shows that he still needs to be played more before any true consensus is reached.

I'd like to emphasize a point I made a a few posts ago: If Mace wrecks your meta, feel free to ban him/change him. That's totally ok! Again, it's NOT wrongbadfun to play in a less competitive meta or be casual players. This has always been true, and been part of the game. There are some very powerful pieces made by WotC, some which completely prevent certain squad types from being played (Yobuck vs. low-hp swarms is what I have in mind, but there are others). If those powerful pieces makes the game less fun to you, ban/change it. If not being able to play those squad types makes your gaming experience less fun, change something. If someone in your group REALLY likes to play swarms of Ewoks, it would be pretty lame if he had to keep playing against Yobuck, so if it's cool with the rest of the group, ban Yobuck! That would probably make the game way more fun for that guy. There is nothing at all wrong with that.

If Mace is too strong in your meta (be it common squad types, player strategies, player skill, or whatever other possible reason), do something to change it. If you aren't a playtester for the v-sets, or if you are but didn't get Mace to test, then he was not tested against your specfic meta. We got a good cross-section of the game, including BOTH casual AND competitive players, and made a piece that was liked by a variety of playgroups. That's the best we can possibly do or be fairly asked to do. Making sure every piece works for every group is impossible.

If something is broken in your group, but there are lots of other groups all over the world that think that piece isn't broken, there's obviously some kind of disconnect. I think it's understood that neither side (the people who say Mace is too strong or the people who say that he's fine) are just making this up. They clearly are both completely convinced of their side.

So if you think Mace is totally broken: Maybe it's just you guys, or your group. Just because you guys think that doesn't make it true. Maybe he is way too strong in your group; if so, your group is not indicative of all of SWM. There are plenty of groups that don't think he's broken, and in fact love the piece. These groups and people range from super competitive to totally casual.

If you think Mace is fine: He probably is for your group. Lots of groups agree with you. However, obviously some groups don't. That's ok. That's what happens in games, especially collectible games. On the competitive level, he is fine; that's been tested at length. But it's obvious that some people think he's broken (whether they're right or wrong isn't really the point). It doesn't mean those people are bad players, they just might play differently than you. I'd never play a squad of all Ewoks, I think that's a bit silly; but I know for a fact that some people think the idea of that is awesome. And that's totally cool for them. I'll just play Yobuck so I can beat them really quickly and we can play a real game (just kidding, of course).

Play as thou wilt.


(As an aside, my Vassal Challenge still hasn't been accepted. If you think he's broken, this is your chance to "open the eyes" of a designer with cold hard evidence. Also, I just like playing this game, and haven't had a game on Vassal in a while. )

Sign ups for cicrush's new Vassal booster league ends in a couple days.

Bill,

This is not being a good ambassador for the game. I happen to agree with you most of the time, and I appreciate all the work you do to keep the game going, but it is not good to turn people off of the game. Do you see the irony of your statement above? In the first sentence, you say, "you all think we are nothing but elitist jerks," implying that it is not true. In the second sentence, you call someone's opinion "stupid", which is a pretty jerky thing to do.

I believe it's not your intention to "hurt" the game, but it seems like it's more important to "win" an online debate than it is to make a player happy and keep them playing the game. Don't get defensive, I'm sure you don't see it that way, but that is the perception you give. An "I don't care what you think" attitude just ends up driving people away. Quite frankly, he deserves an apology even if he started it. (And he would probably claim he didn't.) An apology might keep another person playing SWM.

The game needs players.

+1

Everyone just needs to take a deep breath. Its not right to insult other people online, just cause you aren't insulting them in person. The fact is, this game requires honest players who are willing to voice their opinions, not people who slam those opinions and call them stupid for it. This name calling and stuff is reallly way of topic and in my opinion hurts the comunity as a whole. This game is going to need good players and good designers. I think everyone is a good player. I think the designers we have are good designers. Apologies are in order, i think, for how this interesting topic has degenerated into a cyber-slugfest. Keep it civil people! I would think that personal attacks on anyone would classify as ban worthy, or at least be deserving of a warning.