Mighty Swing is not just for Melee, it is for anycharacter, as long as they are adjacent.

except in every situation in game where it would be more strategic to hit two different targets, than only one. And there are a lot of those.

Further, you can't ignore all of the other abilities that stack with each of them, and even those of you who claim to be looking in a vacuum are of course not. You are colored by your experiences of what works in game, and are most certainly not objective.

I prefer double most of the time, because it gives me greater flexibility. But obviously so much depends on what else the figure has, what squad synergies are being used, and what my opponent brings to the table.

With all of that fully in consideration, I prefer double to twin.

Twin is great, especially for Djem So and AoOs.
Double is more versatile.
The introduction of GMA and the availability of it has really helped top Double over Twin in my book.

Steve, I agree with your post, but that wasn't my point about the vacuum. I was talking about two things. 1st, the ability of a player of the game to do it without privileging his/her own experience. For example, I almost always use movement breakers in my squad, and so the movement issue with double is almost always overcome with swap, tow, GMA, etc. So for my experience, I seldom have issues getting the double attacks off when I need them. Further, I tend to kill scrubs early on in games, where neither twin nor double makes a difference (twin slightly favored for the free reroll on a 1 I guess), and it's the mid/late game where double takes more precedence. Example two, I go right to your post. You mentioned hindering terrain as an issue. However, that shows that you are not looking in a true vacuum, and in fact are privileging your own experience and knowledge of the game. You did exactly what I said, "even those of you who claim to be looking in a vacuum are of course not".

2nd - I was actually talking about the pointlessness of discussing the two in isolation from the rest of the game. Really, there is no reason to talk of a direct comparison, because doing so has little effect on how the game is played anyways.

Further point, twin costs more on a figure, and so generally you get double much cheaper. So any small advantage you might have from twin vs double (such as AoOs) is covered in the additional cost.

I say Twin because you can always CE an extra attack onto it, but twin CE's are less available to the spread of factions.

well, put it this way: say Double Attack in itself [for a nonmelee] costs X. Now, say Twin Attack in itself [for a nonmelee] cost X + Y. So, when we compare, would you rather have Double Attack for its cost or Twin Attack for its cost...

so, in reality if we COMPLETELY isolate the effects, it eventually comes down to opinion and how each person strategizes...for ex. i myself am very conservative so i try to combine getting the most out of a [nonmelee] figure as much as i can without ANY risk of that character taking damage...so, in that direct circumstance id rather have twin, since it gives me a better chance of more attacks, then moving (assuming that on my turn i attack, then move up to 6) and thus moving out of line of sight.

thats IMO, of course ;)

Which if that is all that it is, and can be, is a complete waste of time as that is utterly meaningless in terms of it's effect on the game. My point is, that even those of you claiming that you are doing so, are not capable of it. You cannot isolate the two perfectly no matter what you do, and I really don't see a point in trying anyways.


Lol that has nothing to do with it. I used Vader JH in 2005 and 2006 with triple attack. As to why I was using the Snowspeeder and before that Han Scoundrel (both with twin right). Well that has more to do with the synergy with Princess Leia than anything else. However, since you want to discuss it completely in isolation (sic), then there is absolutely no reason to even discuss what I ran in a tournament (a completely contextual example) because doing so completely contradicts your entire point.



And yet, your counter point (my championship squad) completely violates your own point.

Further, are you aware that I was very close to running a Vader Scourge of the Jedi swap squad as well? In 200, I ran more double attackers than twin by far. You don't get to try to make me look stupid by using one tournament squad of mine, and ignoring every other one I ran that weekend. Further, you are using this as if the context (which was my central point) doesn't matter. It absolutely matters. You've actually proven my point. Twin was used in that particular tournament, because of multiple reasons, which have little to do with the power of twin in some kind of made up isolation. The first is the synergy with PL, the second is the movement breaker of the speeder, the third is the cheap tech of Reeikan, Dodonna, and Lobot in the Rebel faction at 150pts, and the fourth was the legal maps. But you don't want to talk about that, you simply want to pretend like me using a twin attacker proves something without the context. Well quite frankly, that's hilarious, and I think anyone reading this will be laughing out loud at the point.


Of course that is true. And by that measure, it's also true that Darth Bane is much more powerful than Dash Rendar DS. Yet which one is played more, and by what margin? Cost matters, and it's part of the context that you cannot get away from. I will reiterate, there is no point in talking in isolation, other than simply for some mental masturbation. In all purposes and styles of games, the context matters, and in this case, it's cost, ability synergy, squad synergy, point level, legal maps, and so on that matter significantly more than some arbitrary pretend rendering of comparative power.

Is it meaningful to say that Darth Bane is more powerful than Dash? Not in any significant way that I can think of - same in the way you have isolated twin and double.

I could also say that quad attack is better than double. Yet double attackers are played, and none of the quad are ever played outside of very rare occasions, mostly in the odd ball local tournaments with unique restrictions.

I don't believe such a distinction can be made in anyway in isolation that has any value to anyone. To do so, requires completely ignoring any value it might add to the game, and further, I remain unconvinced that any of us are in any way capable of making one.

One last point and maybe this will clear up my position on it. In as much isolation as I can muster, ignoring cost and all the other factors, I still prefer double. Why, because we ignore movement completely, and in doing so, I think anyone would have to prefer double. However, this poll shows that this is not the case for the vast majority. If you want to use my play choices in isolation, I use many more double attackers than twin by a very large margin. (Of course that ignores the reality that there are not that many twin attackers, and double is cheap. Further, most melee are double, and in 200, most jedi that are played have double). But I suspect, you really aren't interested in that level of isolation, because it would prove your points even more meaningless :)

To prove my point further, the two people debating me on it, have used examples that completely prove my point.

I play Mandalorians and the Captain gives Twin to everyone. I prefer double just to be able to get 4 attacks plus whatever modifers come into play for standing still.

ENOUGH.

What someone plays really has no relevance, other than trying to make someone look bad, or better yet, baiting.

This is not a question about squads, but about 2 different abilities that have different strengths and weaknesses. Bring back to that, and not on the posters, or I will delete the posts.

i fear i just dont know both are awsome