Of course you always have to look at who played what. As I've always said, a squad in a rookie's hands versus Bill's hands will have a drastically different outcome.

(but who wants a GOWK only tournament? I hope it never comes to that...)

I think this is what I would play
--operation jolt--
30 Xizor
23 Jarael
22 Imperial Governor Tarkin
36 Twi'lek Black Sun Vigo x2
13 Czerka Scientist
11 Admiral Ozzel
8 Mas Amedda
6 Ugnaught Demolitionist x2
(149pts. 10 activations)

The tally is now 3/8 regionals won by GOWK. But please, before you over hype that part of my predictions, read the rest of what I actually said. I said about 50% of the top spots. Look at where GOWK is finishing. Its going 4-1 in about 90% of the cases. 90% of the GOWK squads are finishing in the top 4, 6, 8.

If you only want to count the winners to make a stupid point that is completely irrelevant (small sample size means that my margin of error for winners alone is like +-6 people), then that is your problem, and clearly you aren't interested in anything other than proving me wrong, not actually dealing with the problem.

But even still, look at the one's where it lost.

Lobo lost in Cincy (he won Owensburo with the same squad) in a very close game to his arch rival and main competition. And if you read how he lost, you wouldn't be making that game out to be some kind of proof that GOWK isn't a problem, that much I can assure you.

Lobo wins Owensburo and people say it was because of his skill, not the squad. Where are those comments in regards to the Cincy regional then? James is equally skilled at this game, and plays a very tough style of play, on a map that benefits his style well.

In Racine, GOWK went 10-3 and 2 losses were to the other GOWKs so GOWK went 10-1 taking 2, 3, and 6th. If we had had a playoff, I am convinced GOWK would have likely won it. Matt had to screw up multiple times against a squad he had never played against in order to lose the one game to a non-GOWK squad that occured that day.

Look at the one in California. The guy got 4 disintigrations in the finals, most importantly, on a full health Obi, and a full health Jarael, that also cost that player his JWM a round too early. Boba ended with 60hps left. Is anyone seriously going to make the argument that that one was won by anything other than sheer luck? Let's play that match out 10 times, even given the 3 disintegrations already occuring. Let's just start with Boba and one Bothan against GOWK at full and 5FPs, Boba is at 60hps. Let's see how many times Boba wins.

Let's look at K-zoo now, where James won his second regional with Push. According to Lou, he won because he clearly out played Engineer, with a hate squad that James knows very well. There was little other strong competition playing GOWK at that tournament. Lou was judging not playing.

Give me a break people.

To reiterrate my predictions one more time, so that you all can stop misquoting me. I said, GOWK will win about 50% of the regionals and take 50% of the top spots.

3/8 = 37.5% which is well within the margin of error. I haven't done the math on GOWK's placements in say top 4, but just glancing at it, it appears to be quite close to 50%, which just as important or perhaps more important than simply who wins the darn things.

The number one issue people, is to actually read how people are beating it when they do. My predictions for how it will be beat are 100% accurate. Generally, people are trying to outpoint it in a tight timed game, and in those kinds of games, one mistake can cost the GOWK player.

Problem is, when we get to Gencon, there are a number of players who are more than capable of playing without any major mistakes all day.

Sheer Luck Ouch.

I think that might be an insult....

I never felt at any point of the game that I was in any real trouble. Also the round I killed the JWM I used a Bothan to kill an Ugnaught....

Anyways thanks

Found this on Wizos and thought it was a great explanation of GOWK's ability:

Yesterday was the first time I've ever played a GOWK squad. I've never played GOWK even in fun games at home. It was the first time I've even looked at Dash Rendar's card since the preview came out, and it was the first time that I ever played Tow Cable.

I am, at best, a sub-par player. Yesterday was only the 2nd sanctioned event that I have ever played in. I totally net-decked the squad (Thanks, Lou!) and didn't even practice beforehand. I borrowed a Dash from a fellow player and didn't even look at his card until I sat down for my first match.

Considering the skill level of the players that I faced... there is no way, in my mind, that I should have come in any less than 24th place (and that's only because 3 players dropped out of the tournament).

Hell, I didn't even realize that GOWK had Force Push 3 until after my first match. I also didn't realize that Dash had Evade. What does that tell you about how hard I worked to win?

I went in completely blind. I went in completely unprepared. I should have failed, miserably... moreso than I actually did. The only reason I didn't come in last place is because of GOWK and nothing else. It had nothing, at all, to do with my skill level.

I don't understand why people are considering luck into the stats. Is this game not based largely upon die rolls? Of course any squad you play will have to win decided upon die rolls ie luck. You can take any good squad and if you roll bad you can lose. You can take any bad squad and if you make your rolls you can win.

From what I saw at our competition GOWK squads in the hands of bad players performed poorly and in the hands of good players did very well. Is that not how any squad should perform? GOWK is a good piece no doubt but broken? I don't think so. I saw first hand how he can be beaten. I had trouble with auto damage pushes as well as just pounding me with shots. If you have shooters that only miss 50% of the time and shooting 10-15 times a round GOWK is going to run out of force points which is what happened to me.

There is always going to be good figs out there and people are going to take advantage of them in competitions where the stakes are high. I didn't follow SMW before this year's events but I bet there was a piece out there someone was complaining about. I've heard from people that Boba, BH is broken. After this set comes out I'm sure we will hear more complaining.

Any game I have ever played you always have your whiners. Unfortunately whiners are usually loud in forums and devs always seem to hear them. Devs start making changes to accommodate this small populace of players and ruin games. If any piece was completely unbeatable then I would agree the piece needed banned. But if the piece can be beaten then it should not be banned.

I know this is not about squad construction but it is about the one piece that alot of people are building around. I'm only reporting what I saw from these builds and the experience in this one regional watching the builds perform.

Ok, I'll show you the math.

Let's eliminate the first 3 disintegrations and merely calculate the rough odds from the point where Boba had 60, and GOWK was full with 5 hps. Boba has one Bothan left (that's what the reports said about it).

There are a number of other factors, but to simplify it, to make it workable, we will assume doors won't be an issue for either team, and that GOWK has to spend one round using Knight speed to catch up to Boba/Bothan (however the reports both sounded like GOWK was already well within attack range at the time of the D).

So, GOWK can do one of two things here. Chase the Bothan and kill it (likely 2 rounds assuming GOWK doesn't get to use push). So, with that scenario, GOWK will need 2 rounds to kill the Bothan, and then 2-3 to kill Boba (based on init won or lost), that equals 8 shots while the Bothan is alive, and 4-6 more depending on the inits, for 12-14 total. If GOWK can push the Bothan instead, then there are only 10-12 shots coming, in other words, 5-7 twin attacks. The odds of not getting a 20 in that many shots are as follows.

5 twins (10 attacks) - 59.9% chance to not roll a 20
6 twins - 54% chance to not roll a 20
7 twins - 48.8% chance to not roll a 20

So in this case, even in the best of circumstances for Boba (winning all inits) he still has only a 51.2% chance to kill GOWK with a 20.

We already know that given the odds of getting through Soresu Style Mastery for Boba to land 120 dmg, is very small in that amount of time, perhaps another 1-2% at best.

Now let's look at alternative two for GOWK, going right after Boba. He needs 2-3 rounds, which will equal 4-12 attacks, or 2-4 twins depending on init.

In the best case for GOWK (as we did the best for Boba above), where GOWK wins init after basing, Boba had an 81.5% chance to not roll a 20 in those 4 attacks.

So, the odds of Boba winning this game, from this point on, range from 19.5% - 51.2%. The odds of GOWK winning range from 48.8%-81.5%. Tell me now, was that luck or not to overcome those odds? More often than not, Boba isn't going to get the 20, even with a Bothan alive.

Now that we have done that, let's back up one more round to when Jarael was Disintegrated. Take away the disintigration, which means Boba continues to shoot her. I assume she was based, so no evade, but that means the JWM gets that one more assault off (remember, the JWM died a round early because of JArael getting the Big D). JWM rolls 16s vs 20, and so puts 20-40 on Boba barring a crit of his own. Now GOWK can clean up easily and without even risking the big D nearly at all. And the JWM could assault the Bothan instead, and so on.

Point is, the game was an example of one player beating heavy odds in his opponent's favor, based on the math. It happens, but to say it was "strategy" is just not based on a solid understanding of how the game works.

I in no way meant to call you personally a whiner. I was speaking in general about people who find a topic and complain to no end because they are losing. That is what I find in the majority of the players complaining about GOWK. Yes he is a good piece but by no means will win all the time. Some players are performing better but not all players.

You may say this game does not take alot of luck into account but I feel personally die rolls can largely change the outcome of any game. I don't care how good you are (and yes I know who you are) if you are rolling 1's and 2's for the majority of your rolls you are going to lose--even with GOWK. If you are running Boba BH or even a Gotal Fringer and hit a 20 on a major piece the game can swing into your favor drastically.

I am a chaos theory supporter and do not go with the odds before you start spouting math to me. My buddy does the same thing. He runs a huge spread sheet giving stats to skills to determine the best pieces in the game. Then he calculates the odds and figures exactly how things should work by the math each round. He doesn't win very much because even though an attack is supposed to hit 50% of the time you could go all day and not hit that 50%.

I'm not some big name in the game nor will I ever be. So my voice may not amount as much as say yours but I will never support banning a piece unless it is just completely unstoppable.

That's the problem, the above is most certainly not true. The majority of people "complaining" (using your word because I wouldn't even call it complaining) are not those people. They are the best in the game. That has never, ever happened in the past. Oddly, the people arguing with us, are primarily the non-DCI and non-competitive players. It is most certainly not people who are losing.

Most of us are "complaining" because of how we are winning with GOWK, not losing against it.

You can feel however you want, but that doesn't make it true. I am arguing that luck is not a major factor in determining game outcomes. You are saying, that because luck does indeed have an effect, it therefore must be major. That's just not true. What if I said luck factors into about 5% of the game outcomes I have played in my career playing DCI? (I did a long statistical analysis of this a year or so ago, and an update not too long ago - the sample size was about 200+ games). Is 5% a "major factor" to you? It sure isn't to me.

Then you name an ultra rare occurance (rolling all 1s and 2s) and name it as something that matters on a "significant level". You are right, I should be factoring an event that will occur once in ever 1.2 Million times I play the game in my analysis. :)

I've been disintegrated twice, once each year at Gencon, in the Championship in the first 1-2 rounds of each game, on one of my major pieces. I won both games despite it. The joke was even thrown around last year, that after a couple people watched me come back from losing my snowspeeder in the 1st round (1st Boba twin) that I should give "disintegration lessons" after the tourney.

Well, then, you clearly misunderstand what I am talking about. You should really read my strategy article series on SWMGamers.com. Knowing how to calculate the numbers (getting the 50% number for example), isn't the same as knowing how and when to attack. The math helps you develop your strategies, but by no means am I advocating that this is a math game. Its a strategy game first and foremost, much like chess. It has a small random component, but there are a great many ways to control that element, and by and large, the outcomes of the game are determined by strategy significantly more than luck. And your point is that it's luck.

If I thought that way, I wouldn't respond to you at all, as you wouldn't be worth my time. I will ask you not to retreat behind elitist comments like that about me again. They aren't fair, they aren't relevant, and they aren't true. They function basically as a way for you to play the victim to gain favor with others based on emotion, rather than on the strength of your argument.

Exactly. I said it many times. If GOWK was legal for Gencon, then a part of the game is basically eliminated, that is meta analysis. All I need to do as a top level player, is figure out which GOWK variant I like best and think can handle the others the best, and play it. My road to the top 8 is all but ensured, without me doing any of the work I have done to get myself there the past two years.

I can count on playing close to flawlessly, and I know how to play to win, and I already know I can beat most other players, so it actually makes winning Gencon, easier for me.

So if this were some kind of "complaint" about losing, or some other selfish motivation, I would be arguing the other side of it. GOWK makes it easier for me to win. Why would I want that gone?

Because the good of the game depends on it in the long run, and because it's makes Gencon much more fun for everyone. That's it. That's my reasons in a nutshell.