So do you build a fleet that's under 300 pts, specifically tailored to a mission or two? And if you do, just how low are you bidding under the 300 pt limit?

OR

Do you build a nice all around fleet, squeeze out every point, push to 298-300 pts and just try to "deal" with whatever mission your opponent will choose?

Separate, but somewhat related: does X-Wing need something like this mission picking or is the game to "fast" with to many turns to implement something like we are seeing in Armada?

Sorry, back on topic: so, how low do you go? 290-295 pts, under 290? Lower than 270? (10% less build, but get to pick the mission?)

Can't wait for this game!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Actually I think giving your opponent initiative and having them pick one of your objectives could be a big plus for you. Or they might be smart and win the bid, but give you initiative. Honestly I think going as close to 300 as possible is the best way to go, since you'll either match the opponent and the dice decide Initiative or one of you wins the bid and either of you might choose either way.

Honestly I don't know whether I'll be taking initiative or giving to my opponent if I win the bid. I guess it'll depend on the match.

Maybe I misread it, if you have the fewest points, you get to decide who is 1st player, correct? Then, whomever is the 1st player gets to choose one of their missions that they brought, correct?

So, if that's all true and I am reading it right, what if I want that one optimum build, taylored for that one mission, then I really want to make sure I am player one. So, (if I am going that route) how far do you go under the 300 pts?

Maybe I misread it, if you have the fewest points, you get to decide who is 1st player, correct? Then, whomever is the 1st player gets to choose one of their missions that they brought, correct?

So, if that's all true and I am reading it right, what if I want that one optimum build, taylored for that one mission, then I really want to make sure I am player one. So, (if I am going that route) how far do you go under the 300 pts?

The problem is, you can't just have one mission, you need to have one mission of each type. (Assault/Defense/Navigate), from which the player with initiative will choose which one you will play. So you still need enough of a flexible fleet to handle those options - rather then locking in for one, because your opponent will see you list and go "hmmm... aint no way I am choosing the navigate mission with all those corvettes in his list" or similar.

Maybe I misread it, if you have the fewest points, you get to decide who is 1st player, correct? Then, whomever is the 1st player gets to choose one of their missions that they brought, correct?

So, if that's all true and I am reading it right, what if I want that one optimum build, taylored for that one mission, then I really want to make sure I am player one. So, (if I am going that route) how far do you go under the 300 pts?

Incorrect. The player with initiative gets to pick from his opponents three objectives. So every player either picks the Objective, or brings it to the game.

You are both incorrect The player with initiative (whoever has lowest fleet cost, or flip coin if the same) gets to choose who goes first. Then the first player chooses which of the second player's objectives to use.

This means that you need to tailor your lists to work with all 3 of your objectives as you don;t know which one your opponent will pick (if they are the first player that is). If you are the first player, you pick from your opponent's objectives - either one that their fleet will be less effective at, or one that your fleet will be best at.

Edit: But to the original question, I doubt I'll go below 295 points as it will likely weaken the fleet to the point that any advantage gained from winning initiative is lost by an inferior fleet.

Yep, okay totally misread that. Yes, whomever is first player, will then have to pick from their opponents 3 objectives (1 of them). So, I still ask, (as Ghost Dancer answered), how low do you bid, thus giving initiative and first player status to your opponent, so that they will have to pick one of your 3 objectives? And yes, I know see even more, just how flexible of a fleet you will need, but you could be pretty devious with your fleet build and choice of objectives.

I am looking at points, just merely from a % standpoint (maybe I shouldn't), but even a 290 point fleet is only a 3% difference, I would think you could way more than make up for this by a tailored fleet for 2-3 objectives that it would accel at. This will be an interesting aspect of this game.

Did any of you ever read any of the Mechwarrior books, where one of the clans, Steel Wolves?, would "bid" an amount of mechs and units to win a battle or take back a planet? There were some funny moments of "honor" were the bidding would start with 5 Mechs and then end up with 4 guys in power armor!

Ya, 2 Vic SDs, maximum firepower objective, ya, I got this with a CR90a, no problem!!!!

As a kitchen table, non competitive gamer, i wouldnt worry about it. If i were competitive i would only try for 296. Any lower and you would lose out on valuable assests to your list. I dont think that going low on points to try and pick the obj. Isnt a good idea. If everybody builds their list around their own objectives, then you want to be the guy that doesnt chhose. The first player chooses one of the second playrrs obj.

I would prefer to go second so my objectives are picked, but I really don't care. I rather have more assets to achieve whatever objective it is. There are only a few (Intel Sweep) that Imperials really don't like, and even that one you could build for once we get more speedy ships like Gladiator.

Yep, okay totally misread that. Yes, whomever is first player, will then have to pick from their opponents 3 objectives (1 of them). So, I still ask, (as Ghost Dancer answered), how low do you bid, thus giving initiative and first player status to your opponent, so that they will have to pick one of your 3 objectives? And yes, I know see even more, just how flexible of a fleet you will need, but you could be pretty devious with your fleet build and choice of objectives.

I am looking at points, just merely from a % standpoint (maybe I shouldn't), but even a 290 point fleet is only a 3% difference, I would think you could way more than make up for this by a tailored fleet for 2-3 objectives that it would accel at. This will be an interesting aspect of this game.

Did any of you ever read any of the Mechwarrior books, where one of the clans, Steel Wolves?, would "bid" an amount of mechs and units to win a battle or take back a planet? There were some funny moments of "honor" were the bidding would start with 5 Mechs and then end up with 4 guys in power armor!

Ya, 2 Vic SDs, maximum firepower objective, ya, I got this with a CR90a, no problem!!!!

Thank you for the incredible reference! I'll see your CR-90, and bid... wait... smallest ship in the game? Never mind, I'm going to find some popcorn and watch

I'm really not certain how much bidding I'll be doing. It will depend on the list of course, but I can see advantage to both winning and losing the bid. Part of this will once again depend on whether we see each others lists before deciding, in which case I will probably start out at -15. That way if I have all great cards I can force the pick on my opponent, but if he has even one objective that he's poorly suited for he's going to regret bringing it.

I can see advantage to both winning and losing the bid.

How is losing the bid ever a good thing? If you lose the bid, your opponent will decide whether to go first or second as best suits his list and/or your objectives (assuming you see each other's lists & objectives before making the decision).

I can see advantage to both winning and losing the bid.

How is losing the bid ever a good thing?

Well, losing the bid means you have more points than them.

That said, I want to try building a really specialized fleet (maybe filled with long range glass cannons, or nothing with a max speed below 4) and then drop a fighter or something to put me 10-15 points under. Then, I can always pick the mission that suits my fleet!

You are both incorrect The player with initiative (whoever has lowest fleet cost, or flip coin if the same) gets to choose who goes first. Then the first player chooses which of the second player's objectives to use.

This means that you need to tailor your lists to work with all 3 of your objectives as you don;t know which one your opponent will pick (if they are the first player that is). If you are the first player, you pick from your opponent's objectives - either one that their fleet will be less effective at, or one that your fleet will be best at.

Edit: But to the original question, I doubt I'll go below 295 points as it will likely weaken the fleet to the point that any advantage gained from winning initiative is lost by an inferior fleet.

Since your nitpicking mine, I'll nitpick yours

This is a bit incorrect, player 1 is always the player with initiative. The player with the lowest point total or who wins the flip decides who has initiative. It would be super OP to both have initiative and make your opponent player 1 (thus forcing him to choose one of your objectives that benefits player 2).

So I was right all along, muahahaha!

Since your nitpicking mine, I'll nitpick yours

This is a bit incorrect, player 1 is always the player with initiative. The player with the lowest point total or who wins the flip decides who has initiative. It would be super OP to both have initiative and make your opponent player 1 (thus forcing him to choose one of your objectives that benefits player 2).

So I was right all along, muahahaha!

Fair play and well spotted. You know what I meant though

The problem with asking this question is that as a player you will have in your mind particular ships, commanders and upgrades which will work well, or synergise together. And it is the point cost of these which will determine the core of your fleet, and then it will probably be a case of "topping up" with fighters that determine your "bid" as such.

e.g.

You might find that you really like the idea of strong heavy hitting ships that deny evade actions, so having 2 Victory class star destroyers with Screed, Intel officers and Overload Pulse's, and then that you like the idea of having Soontir Fel and a TIE Advanced squad combo - that takes you to 256 points.

From there you have 44 points remaining

So if we decide that we don't want any bombers or other interceptors, just a good TIE figher screen, then in added increments of 8 points we can get: 264(1), 272 (2), 280 (3), 288 (4), or 296 (5).

The point I am trying to make is that I think you are going about it backwards - that you should just build your forces but keep in the back of your mind where the most effective point costs/builds are, rather than going "I must find something that works under 290 points" as you could end up discarding some of the most effective builds in the game if it was going to come out at 296 points and might still win you initiative 60% of the time.

Realistically, where the points of most fleets will fall in regard to tournaments, we wont know until people start playing, but I think there will be many experienced wargamers who will be able to build good flexible lists right up to 300 points that will be able to play well across most objectives.

I think a balanced list will be the best approach so you don't find yourself wanting. The bid war may be more of a concern for players who choose to build a fleet that excels at one task, and want their objective set to be in play. I can see a new use for slow B-wings with many of these situations now.

I'm still having a hard time wrapping my head around what an Armada initiative bid actually looks like... It feels like it would have to be below 290 points, right? Most of the lists I am currently playing with do not end up at a nice round 300. I'm always falling in the range where there is an upgrade card or two or an extra fighter squadron that puts me solidly in the 290 neighborhood. I'll have to look at the lists I have written down at home now that I can apply preferred objective cards to them to see where they all sit and what I think it would take to get a legitimate initiative bid out of some of them.

Most of the lists I am currently playing with do not end up at a nice round 300. I'm always falling in the range where there is an upgrade card or two or an extra fighter squadron that puts me solidly in the 290 neighborhood.

Same here. If I'm building a list for specific objectives, then top up those last few points, I'll leave it for the initiative bid. But as Maverick says, you don't want to deprive your list of something necessary just for the bid as you will probably suffer for it in the long run.

To me, this is what will make list building really interesting. Do you go for specific objective-based lists and risk losing the bid, or do you make a more balanced list hoping it will cope with most objectives? No list is going to work well with all the objectives though, so so need to consider how to deal with those where you are at a disadvantage.

Thats where your opponent having to have one of each type is essential - cause they might have one that you "hate" given your fleet, but hopefully there should be at least one that you can do competitively in.

Can't see how you can tailor your fleet anyway, don't you just put a force together you like and the total cost, is what it costs, you can't change that or you don't end up with your preferred fleet.

294, cause i've never done less than a 98pt xwing squad.

I like the idea of bigger and more well-rounded builds over Obj-specific. Even if you win every bid and make the opponent choose from your own Objs, they will always pick the one that suits their build best, and you will have no influence at all over how effective their build is in that objective. At the same time you potentially reduce your effectiveness in other settings, which means that when it does go wrong, it could go horribly wrong. Trash compactor wrong. Ewok war-plan committee wrong.

It will also be interesting to see what happpens when fleets with the same Objs and builds go up against each other - Rebels and Imps will naturally favour some objectives, so you will also lose any speciality advantage in these match-ups, and maybe just end up wishing you has spent the other 20 pts.

Maybe. I have been very wrong many times before.

Hey anfauglir, you make a good point. The point of bidding is to catch someone in a mistake, and keeping the power to do so on your side of the table. If I bid -20 and my opponent can't effectively hit my objectives then I'll have him pick sure, but what I see happening more often, at least at first, is he brought at least one card that matches my fleet much better than his own. And that point he/she has doomed themselves, because I'm going to use that one objective they shouldn't have brought to tear them apart.

I like the idea of bigger and more well-rounded builds over Obj-specific.

I agree with you to a point. However, I think its impossible to make a build that can cope well with every objective. For example, some objectives are better with fewer big ships (which tend to be slower), others favour lots and/or fast ships. The trick will be finding a reasonable balance, but that in itself is half the fun

I agree with Cobalt, that making sure the objectives you bring for your opponent to pick from should benefit yourself in the situation vs trying to guess what will be hard for your enemy.