Wow, that's really great stuff Deri.

Reading a lot of the comments in that thread about Bastilla being an auto-include for OR got me to thinking about the recent thread about the Meta. If you go through the list doesn't nearly every faction have auto-includes for their top tier squads? Doombot and Mas for Republic; Thrawn and Mas for Imps; Revan for Sith; Ganner for NR; Luke for Rebels; Whom for Seps ; I could be off a bit but why is Bastilla any different than every other faction?

Auto-Include is a bad thing now?

Rebels always use Rieekan or Dodonna
Imperials always use Mas and almost always Thrawn
Republic always uses R2 and most of the time Mas
Mandos almost always have the mando captain
Seps almost always have San Hill
Vong always pack a Yammosk
New Republic will usually play Ganner and Dodonna
Old Republic uses Bastilla

Maybe the above listed pieces are Auto-Include because they are just good?

I'm not a huge fan of Bastilla squads personally, but I do like that they exist. CE Heavy squads have to take into account how to play against her. She's a great counter to Swap squads and also to other things people seem to hate (Poggle, Naboo, etc). Does she always beat those squads? No, at gencon I had a Sith squad based entirely around 2 CE's and played OR twice. Both games I was able to win, I didn't even go after her until the endgame fighting in both of those matches either.

Is she annoying? Yes. Was she nessesary to make the OR playable? Eh, not really. But the designers were looking to give OR some kind of identity. Pre-Bastilla they had nothing so I'm cool with her. Is she bad for the game? No.

That's just my opinion anyway, I really don't get why people (myself included sometimes) complain about pieces in this or any game. The game has a few really awesome pieces? Then it's high time I beat them and prove people wrong.

Thanks Echo. +1138. I think you made all the points I was thinking of making and made them more clearly.

I have no problem with Bastila being an auto-include or being power 10. It's the way she's power 10. She counters directly and nearly completely a type of squad that I like - synergy heavy squads (CEs being a prime example). It's the fact that ABM can be on for over 90% of the time between rounds 2 and 7. (Turn it on with the first activation of rounds 2, 4, and 6.) Most of the time, that's the whole skirmish, although you get some small windows if you win initiative or can out-activate her. And she can do it while hiding in the back - the exact problem that the Rebels had.


I actually like the ABM concept - I just don't think you should be able to have it on so often. Any of several things would have made it fine in my book...

* It lasts until the end of the round instead of until Bastila's next activation
* Bastila started with 1 Force instead of 3. Then it could be on for rounds 2, 3, 5 and 6 - and Bastila has 2 force after activating in round 7.
* The ability cost 4 Force. Then it could be on for rounds 2, 3, 5 and 6 - and Bastila has 2 force after activating in Round 7.

But somehow, there should be a round (before the game is over, but not round 1) where it's not active.

@ Dan


The OR is the only faction to suppress CE's boardwide, where is the issue? [/sarcasm]
The rebels do everything well, ABM took one aspect away.


Just a factor of what was thought as the best not actually being the best. Seeing as you were the only rebels and you won speaks volumes.
I'm not gonna talk about the previous year where 7 out of 8 finalists were rebel.


incorrect. It wasn't just the rebels. Every tempo control is a CE, every swap is a CE. Two of the most powerful gameplay mechanics. Not to mention the separatist lancer CE's and Plo kloon double death shots that were also a factor in the decision. I could go on. Really your comment is just short sighted. You've taken one aspect of the problem, Rebels, and based the design decisions around that. There was so much more to the whole scope of the game teetering around stuffing as many CE's into a squad as possible. I'm sure you love it as a player but the decision was more about design. "how do you get OR up and running without just hashing out the same things?"

The intent was to give the OR an identity. The intent was to put boundaries on the Meta. It achieved all that.


These two statements contradict. On one hand you say it wasn't a problem, then you specifically say the rebels were a problem.
I don't care about CE heavy squads, they are a fine way to play. But this game has never rewarded that at the top (rebels the exception). The metagame has always been a balance of things. Balance your melee, your door control, your shooters and your CE's and you will have a good shot. Lean on one factor too much and you lose. Its been that way since the games inception in 2004. One or two CE's make the most balanced squad. If you wan't to have a fun game and stack them, Great! Enjoy it! Have fun but realise you are having a fun uncompetitive game. The meta is never and has never been about that
It was clear to me at the time that CE's were falling out of that balanced scope of metagame squad design. All ABM has really done is say "you can't rely on your CE's too much." If the rebels fell because of that it was the imbalance of WOTC design, not ABM.

Still, ABM hasn't killed CE's contrary to popular belief. Jerry's squad this year, with his soviets, was based around masses of CE's. more than a dozen cheap figures boosted out the woo haa. The squad i ran was a "traditional" CE hate squad, Strong disruptive with movement breaking. No hope against Jerry. Too much firepower, too many figs with Twin deathshots and didn't even need to get close for disruptive to do anything. Real fun to play against. Props to him for great design, i think his losses were all 2 point wins to the opponent. So his squad is basically the extension of what happends when CE's run wild. Not even ABM stands against it, the old ways of kurbing CE's certainly couldn't do it.

Yep, lots of CE squads were hurt by ABM, ones that perhaps shouldn't have had the "rebel" treatment. I think where this all breaks down is that you can only design from the top down. You can't design pieces with casual play in mind whilst ignoring what it does to the top tables unless it will never reach the top tables.
If the rebels CEs were a problem at the top tables, which you just said they were, then all CE heavy squads suffer when you challenge CE heavy squads. The effect wasn't unplanned, it was inevitable. But the design, IMO, was forced by the design that WotC implemented. They undercosted every rebel commander, they made this pod of cheap guys sitting at the back controlling things. It probably wouldn't have been an issue if the matagame was restricted to 5 factions (even though it clearly started to be one) but as soon as you open it up to 9, all of which need a separate flavour, then you really start to have an issue.



the OR didn't need her, the game needed her. Rebels were collateral damage because they had their game based on stupidly cheap commander effects. I don't know if you remember at the time, but people stopped playing the "fan favorite" faction because they were always played, with all the same figures. That might explain why, in 2010, you didn't face any in a meta that saw little change.

so with how she is now, she is strong but not unbeatable.

If you made those changes to her, where do you think she and the OR faction would go?

Its not up.



As for auto includes.

that was a WotC design. They do it with magic (red without lightning bolt? Blue without cancel?), they did it with SWM. the Vsets were supposed to be as WotC centric as possible.

It's pretty simple in my mind, although I have to confess a lack of high-level tournament play.

CEs make squads good (In particular Rebels).
>
ABM kills CEs for 33 points.
>
ABM can destroy entire factions.
>
This sucks.


Also,

"rebels have more figures than any other faction, and yet ABM makes them obliterated?

Pshaw."

Why does this mean they can overcome a piece that annihilates their squad synergy? Having more completely uncompetitive pieces dosen't mean anything in terms of competitive playability.


"They do it with magic (red without lightning bolt? Blue without cancel?), they did it with SWM. the Vsets were supposed to be as WotC centric as possible. "

Magic uses 60 card decks with the order of cards randomized before play. Very, very, very different from SWM.

" How many people play if they arn't in a tournament or getting ready for one."

Um, me?
Besides, it's a proven fact of every game that tournament and competitive players are HEAVILY outnumbered by casual players. Admittedly, the emergence of the V-sets instead of normal WotC products has trimmed the number
of casual players, but the gap is still there in all likelihood.

Well things are a little quiet now so we need things to discuss Gerry



Emphasis mine there. That's why Bastila needs to exist with ABM and I'm glad she does. If there were too many squads that relied on commanders that can just hang back then no one would score 3 point wins. This, would be bad for the game. Bastila helps to keep squads like the Naboo in check so that way only a player with the combo of skill, amazing squad building, extensive play testing, and a little luck can make the top 8 instead of the top 8 being rife with CE dependent squads.

So yeah, the discussion may be a little stale but it's still worthwhile to have.

NPE, not unbeatable.



So make other good pieces to bring OR up. OR doesn't have to be saved by a single piece.

@ fingersandteeth

Some of us like her, I for one.

I have both won with her and lost with her, also won and lost against her. Personally I don't use her every time in old republic squads so don't believe in the so called auto include that has been mentioned by other members. Yes she is a powerful character but I can name just as many others in different factions that are just as powerful in a game. Yes her power is different to others but that does not change the fact that there are other powerhouse's already in game.



@ Sithborg

"Rebel's weren't just knocked down a peg. They were nearly obliterated."

Sorry I disagree with this Scot, the last time I lost using her was to Rebels, Totally cut up by super stealth and totally out activated. Rebels can still win, just not every time which is how it should be. No faction should win every time which of cause includes Old Republic. Are you telling us that you have never won against OR since ABT came out? If the answers yes not sure what to say to that, however if the answers no then I see no reason for the hate. This applies to everyone not just you.





Any way fingersandteeth just like to say thanks for doing this in a new thread, and just wonted to let you know that not all of us hate the character. Plus I would like to say I agree 100% on all the points made in your original post.

Rebels definitely don't do everything well. They do cheap tech well. Good cheap CEs, good cheap Override. Things they don't do well: Damage output (they used to be alright here, but now damage has amped up and Rebels have failed to keep up), survivability (they've got some Bodyguards in there, but in general have very low HP and Defense), Melee damage (they have basically no good Melee attackers; Galen Marek was an attempt to fix this, but unfortunately didn't work as well as we would have liked). They have low stat lines in general and no real good way to increase their stats (no Defense boosts at all and very rare Attack boosts). Their tech is their strength, and a lot of their tech came from their CEs. People didn't just play lots of CEs with Rebels because the CEs were good; it was that and because they NEEDED those CEs.



So was the intent to hurt every tempo control CE and every swap CE? Lancer squads generally have 2 CEs (San Hill and GGDAC or Whorm), so they weren't stacking CEs by any means. Plo Koon double death shots was a kind of gimmicky squad that won a single regional; it wasn't much of a problem. Again, it looks to me that stacking CEs wasn't the problem, and it's starting to look more like you just wanted to cut out CEs as a major part of the game. What counts as stacking CEs? 2 CEs in one squad? To me that's crazy. Swap squads don't stack CEs, they just have a couple. You're not making compelling arguments at all that the intent was to actually stop "stacking" CEs, because you're not making a compelling argument that "stacking" CEs was a problem.



They don't contradict, there's an important difference that you must have missed. REBELS were a problem; CE-heavy squads aren't inherently a problem. Rebels specifically went too far with stacking CEs, I can agree with that. But stacking CEs isn't always bad, and it wasn't something that needed hate.




Well, no, it's both. WotC left Rebels with very little tools outside of their awesome CEs. I assume they never imagined there would be a piece that easily cancelled CEs boardwide. You can't design a piece that practically eliminates a faction from competitive play and say "Well it's how that faction was designed". Well, that faction was designed with a certain playstyle in mind, and the new piece wrecked that playstyle. It's like if a 33 point piece were made that gave all enemies Melee Attack and Mando players were told "Well that's because of an imbalance Mandos, not a problem with this new piece". If a faction leans on something and does well with it, then you kick that thing out from under them, I don't think it's fair to blame the faction for leaning on it.



Once again, stacking CEs CAN be a problem, that doesn't inherently make them a problem. The fact that it takes something like the new Panaka and Naboo Deathshots which everyone seems to hate to get over the blow that ABM dealt to CE-based squads really says something I think. Naboo Deathshots is the ONLY CE-heavy squad that I think is worth playing right now. It's also by no means an unbeatable squad and it has plenty of weaknesses, though. In fact, ABM still hurts the Naboo squads a LOT. The discussion of whether or not Naboo squads are bad for the game is a totally different discussion, but they are definitely the most powerful CE-stacked squad that we've ever seen, and the efficiency of CE-stacked squads had to increase that dramatically in part to make up for ABM.

ABM shifted the goalposts dramatically, the Naboo pieces are the first time we've seen CEs catch up. If you think Naboo squads are a problem, you have to at least partially blame ABM's design, because that's how strong CE-based squads have to be just to compete with ABM-based squads.



I agree with designing from the top down, but really my main point overall is that you didn't have to challenge CE-heavy squads in that way. The Rebel CEs that were a problem didn't have Rebel-specific effects. Other things could have been done to counter those Rebel CEs without countering ALL CEs. Black Ops was a great way to handle tempo control without having to eliminate ALL CEs. Like I said in my first post, there are ways to counter every one of the Rebel CEs outside of just cancelling CEs. Cancelling CEs was the easy way to deal with it, but I think it was a bad way to deal with it.



Well, for one thing the 2010 meta was drastically different than the 2009 meta. For one thing, we moved to 200 points for the first time that year. Also, like you mentioned earlier in your post, 2009 was truly Rebel-dominated (for reasons totally separate from CE-stacking; primarily because of a very weak map list with Teth, which Rebels could seriously take advantage of with the Snowspeeder) while in 2010 there were only a few Rebel players.

But really my main point is that the game didn't need her, and I have yet to see a compelling argument that it did. Stacking CEs wasn't a game-wide problem; Rebels were the only ones to do it competitively. Making counters to the things the Rebel CEs did specifically would have been a far better answer than cancelling all CEs.