I disagree. I've been having pretty good success with Sith. Even one with only 6 base activations. It is just really difficult to run. [/quote]

Your squad was one of the reasons I felt that I could run Mace with so few activations and still do well. I really like your squad and I want to run Sith myself now and improve with them. Also, I'm not saying that only Mace makes it possible to run low act squads, he is just one possible piece that makes it viable.

And Bill, thanks for compliment. For me melee pieces work better because when I run shooters they die quickly, but I think overall melee pieces are more difficult to use.

I have no problem with Critdu. That being said, I do believe that he is competitive in the right hands and with the right gameplan going in to a tournament, as Hinkbert demonstrated.

I think the death of the 10 Mice drop has done wonders for big beat squads. That's why I'm packing Wuher, even if it seems like nobody is trying to run, because it just takes one person to gamble on it (which with Lobot's options, isn't a huge risk), to ruin my day. I'm almost tempted to run it at a Regional just to try and scare up more usage. He was a nice benefit at MI already against people trying to bring in Mice and R7s. I'm genuinely shocked he isn't used more.

I don't think anyone is saying he isn't good. But, the evidence shows he isn't nearly the monster, overpowered beast most are making him out to be, which your post is very reminiscent of.

That is not clear. I still fully believe he's about 1.5. There are too many bad match ups for him to win Gencon, which would be what I consider tier 1. It's still possible though, because you can get lucky on matchups even in a big tournament like Gencon, but the odds would be lower than a number of other squad choices. Hence, 1.5, not tier 1.

Are you going to tell us what you think the best Tank squad is? The Michigan one had Eeth Koth and Dash, right? Personally I'd always take Rex over Dash in a low activation squad, but Dash does at least benefit from GOWK's CE.

Ok, so what do you consider tier 1? how many squads have won a 200 point gencon tournament? And what does this mean until a squad wins a Gencon it is only tier 1.5?

I like these definitions...

Tier 1 squad: A squad that can win a major tournament.

Tier 1.5 squad: A squad that would be considered Tier 1, but it isn't because it matches up unfavorably with one or a few Tier 1 squads to the point that it couldn't win a major tournament.

Tier 2 squad: A squad that can beat some Tier 1 squads, but would lose to most of them, or has an auto-loss (not just unfavorable match-up) versus some Tier 1 squads or on some maps.


The definitions are my own wording, but based on how it seems the terms are used around here. So is a Mace squad Tier 1 by this definition? If the regional tournaments are major tournaments, then by definition yes. But perhaps regionals aren't large enough to establish a squad as Tier 1. However, I'd say they (mostly) are major tournaments and that Mace squads are Tier 1 since they won one. It doesn't mean Mace is overpowered - it just means he joins many other squads on Tier 1. With the balance the Vsets have brought, there are MANY more squads that are Tier 1 now. This is a very good thing!

Can a Tier 1.5 squad win Gencon? I would say no... if it wins, by my definition it is Tier 1 simply by virtue of its winning. Unless Gencon is not a major tournament.

Just how I see things.

Using that definition, I'd allow it to be called Tier 1.

But the difference for me, is that I don't limit it at "can it win", I go by likelihood - which I admit is entirely problematic and interpretive. I've never thought to put a percentage on it, but what the hay, let's try.

I'll say, Tier 1, (assuming squads that will be played by top tier players) are squads that have a > 50% chance of beating more than 75% of the squads in a given tournament.

Tier 1.5 are those that have a > 50% chance of beating 50%-74% of squads.

Tier 2 would be > 50% chance of beating less than 50%.

Even with my breakdown, you could in theory have a great player, some day run a true Tier 2 squad and take it to the top 8 at Gencon. I'd be willing to say that Frank did that with the Gungan/Yoda Tank actually. But that doesn't make the squad tier 1.

Jonny did it with a 2nd place finish at the Chicago regional 2 years ago with a squad of entirely Gungans, Rex and Tarpuls - Chicago had 37 players, and something like 10 current HoFers playing. He'll even tell you, Gunigans (spelling intentional) was not Tier 1.

But the real problem with all of this, is that its really not the most helpful way to think of squads. A meta is constantly evolving, not static. Frank's squad was tier 1 by FA's definition that day, because it countered the meta well, and he played it great - but it would have been easy to deal with if people were planning for it (surprise was half the battle for him, from his own words).

I prefer to talk of the gatekeepers than to call something tier 1. I'd be more willing to put Mace in as a Gatekeeper (actually Republic Tank squads are a gatekeeper in the current meta) than I would tier 1. I think you have to factor in the possibility of running into one, but you certainly don't have to build your squad specifically to counter it.

And to the point that strong shooter squads support your point because they "counter Mace well", no that's entirely wrong. We said Mace wouldn't take over the meta because there were already strong shooter squads, such as Echani, Death Mandos, and so on. That actually is 100% not in support of your point that people are supposedly building to beat Mace (which so far, no evidence has shown me that people are).[/quote]


I am new to this game and I have been following along with all this with close attention (so I do not know all the past to the argument) and I believe you have turned yourself into proving that what you are talking about counters itself.

Here is my point

You simply cannot rate an army without rating the combination of the army with the player.
To say that a top tier player can take a tier 2 army and make it to the final 8 in GenCon kind of destroys the argument that it is a tier 2 army, b/c it has been played at an above tier 2 level.
If their is the supposedly best army and it is played terribly than the army sucks.

This is why you see these "incredible mishaps of fortunes" some supposedly crap army plays an experienced player with a "top tier" army and wins. The power of the relationship between the player and the army stumps the tier of an army or the tier of a player by themselves.

So in this case this guy who won the regionals with the Mace army was the top tier for army/player combo.

Which is why it is silly to rate armies b/c lots of new armies come out all the time with potential to win it just depends on how it is played. I think if we all follow that approach we will not be stuck with people all running the same old combos all the time and their might be more creativity.

NO SOUP FOR YOU!