Ah so what is the best list in this game then?

There isn't one. That's what makes it a great game.

This statement is just as unsubstantiated as his.

Not entirely. We have numerous examples of builds that are better against one set of opponent lists but worse against others, we have no examples of a list that is better against all lists. One cannot argue that there is a "best" out of rock, paper and scissors. All lists created so far are better against some and worse against others. Whilst it's theoretically possible that there is a list out there that is only better against others and never worse, it seems highly unlikely based on both our understanding of the game and on all precedence.Furthermore, the question itself is incomplete. A list might work well with a particular strategy or poorly with another. Depending on the skill in executing a strategy a list could be good for one player and bad for another. I made good use of my VSD in my last game. In my first game, it's slowness was a liability that basically cost me the game (whereas with a gladiator in its place, I would have been okay). The difference between the two was not the ship, which was the same, but my increased skill at manoeuvring. The point I am making is that a list is a complex set of variables and it's not about having the right variables exactly, but about knowing what to do with particular variables. A screwdriver is not better than a hammer. They both depend on the intentions of the person using them. Therefore the question is itself quite misleading. It presupposes the list has value independent of the player.So in short, I don't believe my statement is just as unsubstantiated as theirs.

So you want me to use my Victory as a Hammer and my Nebulons as a screwdriver?

Dude he said that a list was the second best in the game. And out of sheer curiosity i asked which is the best list in his opinion. I know that in a balanced game with variable objectives there should not be a best or second best list...

Hey, my first response to you was just friendly praise of the game. I just wanted to say that one of the things that make the game great is that there isn't a "best list". It was someone else who responded claiming what I said had no basis that got the big reply, that's all.

Please don't use you VSD as a hammer - those things are expensive!

Ah so what is the best list in this game then?

There isn't one. That's what makes it a great game.

Dude i was making fun because he said that that was the second best list in the game...

Nothing goes over my head. My reflexes are too fast - I would catch it.

Ah so what is the best list in this game then?

There isn't one. That's what makes it a great game.

Dude i was making fun because he said that that was the second best list in the game...

Nothing goes over my head. My reflexes are too fast - I would catch it.

Metaphor?

Ah so what is the best list in this game then?

There isn't one. That's what makes it a great game.

Dude i was making fun because he said that that was the second best list in the game...

Nothing goes over my head. My reflexes are too fast - I would catch it.

Ah so what is the best list in this game then?

There isn't one. That's what makes it a great game.

Dude i was making fun because he said that that was the second best list in the game...

Nothing goes over my head. My reflexes are too fast - I would catch it.

Metaphor?

I think the range is too short to make your squadrons useful. They either hang back next to it and do nothing with a lot of protection, or Haven moves at speed 1 in case they get engaged and then you're wasting your whale just sitting supporting your fighters..

It helps against inexperienced players, but anyone who's played against it knows how to come in, lock the squadrons down and take Haven out of range. That was my experience at my latest tournament. It was bad enough that I won't tech to squadrons with an AF again - it's just too many upgrades for something that's too easily broken up and not useful...

^^^this! After a game with the Gallant Haven today It does restrict your fighters to stay in distance one , which to me is really short. I have come to a conclusion that for what I want to do in the game that the Gallant Haven title is just not for me. Rebel ships are just too squishy, so dumping all your point in upgrades on a title ship is not necessarily a good thing.

You could be bumping that two ship list up to a three capital ship builds with enough room to squeeze in five or six non unique squadrons... And every time I use a Neb B I want to play it like Salvation. So I think for here on out I'm going focus on more offensive builds and try to squeeze in as many capital ships as I can

I'm going to lead this post with this disclaimer: I play this game competitively. Very competitively. I'm not saying this to sound like a jerk (though I'm sure some of you will take it that way) I'm saying this to let you know that I've played these lists out on the table and I want to share what I found to help the community get better. Obviously, a lot of this won't apply to the more casual crowd, and that's fine, how you play the game is up to you and only you.

I know that in a balanced game with variable objectives there should not be a best or second best list...

This isn't entirely true. X-Wing is a balanced game. Warmachine/Hordes is a balanced game. MTG is a balanced game. Armada is a balanced game. None of these games have a "true" best list/deck (each meta is different) but they do all have an "upper tier" of lists or builds. Depending on where the meta for each game is determines what is currently at the top. Right now Dash/Corran is dominating X-Wing. Circle is probably the best faction in Hordes. Gallant Haven + Aces is probably one of the best lists you can take in Armada, the only thing we've come up with so far that consistently beats it is CR-90 spam.

BUT WAIT!!! You say. These boards are full of posts of people saying that they're wrecking Haven's face off! You're in the vocal minority! These people have beaten it with X,Y,Z lists. ...And you aren't wrong. But I personally have played at least 10-15 games against the Haven by this point (probably close to 35-40 for 300pts by now) , and other players in my meta have as well. We've taken the lists that people have beaten Haven with. And we experienced the exact same things said in this thread: The Rebel player had a hard time keeping squadrons in range, they could be tied up, etc etc....

And then the Rebel players got better. And so did everyone else. And an interesting thing started happening: Haven started winning. A LOT. We essentially reached a point of elasticity with our builds and their potential while the Haven players kept getting better. It is a extremely unforgiving list, but played well, can easily overcome bad matchups and blow out good ones. Essentially, it boils down to certain lists have a certain potential- meaning that no matter how skilled you are as a player, you will ultimately reach a point where the list will not simply get any better. And that point for Haven is much much higher than pretty much every other list in the game right now. Skill can only get you so far; if the best Chessmaster in the world starts with only half of his pieces, can he still win the game even through skill even though his play is being limited by the tools he has been given to use?


To give you an idea, the "best" lists in our meta (which doesn't reflect your meta, but might be close), in somewhat order:

CR-90 spam
Aces High
Motti double VSD Warlord/Dominator (<- What I've been playing)
Triple/Quad Glad
Double Frigate
VSD/Dominator


I know this post is very TL;DR, but my point is that if you keep practicing and just grind out games, certain pieces (in this case Haven) start to shine a lot more than others, and that certain pieces can shine a lot more than others. I really hope those of you trying to make Haven work stick with it, because it is VERY rewarding.

Throw stuff at the wall. See what sticks. Worse thing that happens is you got a game in.

-Fel

I like Fel's post.

The game has proven a very deep well for me to dip into so far. Just when I make some typical gamer, over the top, "this is awesome" / "this sucks" observation, something comes up that changes my mind.

Can't wait for my next game and my next eye opener. Maybe Haven will be there.

Ah so what is the best list in this game then?

There isn't one. That's what makes it a great game.

This statement is just as unsubstantiated as his.

Now, there is no "best list". Everytime that pops, I can guarantee that it will be smacked down. This is due to objectives and obstacle placement being extremely important.

Thing about the Gallant Haven is that its an Assault Frigate. Assault Frigates are very good at long range, possibly better than VSD. VSD get better once they can come to grips with you in medium to short range (if you took a 1), but the AF excels sitting at range 3 and throwing 3-6 red dice from its side arcs. At this range its evade works and it can brace and redirect. Normally, this means you have to close in on the AF, and thats when the Gallant Haven is worth its points.

Fully tricked out:

Assault Frigate Mark IIB

Adar Tallon

Flight Controllers

Expanded Hangar Bay

Gallant Haven

Comes to 101 points.

Give it an escort of:

Wedge

Xwing

Xwing

Xwing

And you have an extremely rough nut to crack. If your opponent moves to jump your fighters, you are defended by Gallant Haven, and then Wedge absolutely decimates things. If you ignore the fighters and come to attack, then the Gallant Haven sends the 4 fighters out on a sortie and hammers you HARD.

I run this as part of my list. The other half is either double CR-90s built for speed backed up by an Awing each, or another Assault Frigate, the Paragon, built to maul from the broadsides that flies in formation with the Gallant Haven. Very hard nut to break.

Zoccola, try Farlander Triple tapping with Tallon + Yavaris will kill pretty much any ship in the game if they don't have shields.

Ah so what is the best list in this game then?

There isn't one. That's what makes it a great game.

This statement is just as unsubstantiated as his.

Actually, the reviews, sold out status, etc proves that this is one of the greatest capital ship game since Gothic.

Now, there is no "best list". Everytime that pops, I can guarantee that it will be smacked down. This is due to objectives and obstacle placement being extremely important.

X-wing could not be kept in stock anywhere. It was highly rated and touted in any number of reviews. It quickly became both FFGs best selling products and one of the top selling miniature games overall.

And despite that you'd be lying if you tried to assert that it did not have a very constrained meta initially and even through the first few waves.

2 of the 4 ships in the initial offering were sub-par even at that point (1 is still waiting in it's fix), many of the pilot options were and still are never seen, and most of the upgrades (including whole upgrade types) were and are complete non-factors.

And despite that it sold extremely well and was highly reviewed. As such I think it is folly to assume that Armada selling well, especially initially, is some indicator that it is so uniformly balanced.

I freely grant you that there is not likely one single best list (FFG is better then that), but there is absolutely going to be a group of better lists proving themselves over time. And there are absolutely going to be ships, squadrons, upgrades, and even objectives that are going to prove themselves to be simply not competitive compared to other options.

I feel as if you are setting an expectation that Armada can't reach, and more importantly does need to reach to be a successful and even well balanced game.

My regular opponent and I spoke of this after our last game.

I think the game has a self-righting mechanism, while it has to be close to balanced it doesn’t have to be perfect. Perhaps the most obvious is the use and play of the various missions. The game is asynchronous, the two sides have different capabilities and quite different strategies that come from that.

In wave two the very interesting thing seems to be that the whole Rebel/Imperial dichotomy we have now is further changed, to the extent that even Rebel/Rebel or Imperial/Imperial games can have two or more strategic differences in the approach the players have to the missions.