I had the opportunity to both play in and TO a Store Championship over the weekend. I had a good time and think the rest of the players did as well. We ended up with 12 players total, which I think was a pretty solid number.

Some observations:

7 out of the 12 players were only playing 2 ships! This was a really big surprise to me. One of the lessons I had learned from playing Armada competitively to this point was the overall value of activations. i had assumed that the general activation count would trend upwards as more folks played Wave 2 ships. In this case, I was really wrong. I can see the appeal of playing 2 large ships + squadrons, but think it puts you at a large disadvantage. (I had 5 ships in my fleet) Have others been seeing a similar trend?

We were pretty evenly split between Rebels and Imperials, which was nice. Also, no one admiral was a dominant choice and there was a nice representation of the different options. If there was a surprise, it was that Screed was not present at all. He had been the Imperial go to guy for such a long time.

There were no Nebulon-Bs.

It was a really easy tournament to TO. No disputes that I had to settle and really only a couple of places where I had to clarify any rules.

Overall, I was pleased with the quality of the prize support that was offered.

There were several games with over 100 points gained by objective tokens. With the new MoV chart, those points can really swing a tourney. Definitely something to consider in list construction.

Amazing that there wasn't a single Yavaris or Salvation in 12 lists!

I am not liking 2 Large ships with squadrons. I'm with you. I think activation advantage is very important.

I'm thinking the average will settle on 3-4 activations with moderate fighter/bomber cover.

I run heavy squadrons and I see 3 ships as the bare minimum. Rebel squadron builds without Yavaris... What is wrong with these people. Best 62 points you can spend.

I play at home, I have 3 opponents, so my meta is at times very exaggerated to what would seem to be normal. As such suggesting what your meta should be looking like is never an easy task.

One of the strongest fleets I am playing against is a 3xGSD + Raider + Rymerball. I struggle with a 3 ship list if that goes first because Demolisher has every chance that it can play last on one turn and first on the next.

In order to play first the fleet has a 15 point bid, our player here really wants to play first if he can.

So when I Iook at what other people are doing, with a 400 point fleet, 2-3 ships and almost no Squadrons I am left to wonder. But, here's the thing: It's their meta and if it is working for them, who's to say. They don't play at my house, so as strange as it seems to me, it is their experience that counts. What gets interesting is when my friends and I take a road trip.

I ran 2 ships yesterday (Sunday) at a Store Championship. Demolisher, and an ISD. My previous build included a Raider.

I dropped the Raider for more squadrons (about 30 more points there) and a couple extra upgrades on my two remaining ships.

I did better with this list than I did with my 3 ship list in almost every case. I'm just going to tweak the list a little, but I think 2 ships are very viable - which does surprise me because I did not expect that to be case at the onset of the Wave.

Amazing that there wasn't a single Yavaris or Salvation in 12 lists!

I am not liking 2 Large ships with squadrons. I'm with you. I think activation advantage is very important.

I'm thinking the average will settle on 3-4 activations with moderate fighter/bomber cover.

I absolutely detest running just 2 ships. 3 is an absolute minimum. Preferably 4.

It's all about those activation. Going second AND having less ships is so incredibly painful. Like my game with CaribbeanNinja yesterday even the mighty ISD II with its speed and firepower could not bring its guns to bear in this situation. I think he got off 1 obstructed long-range shot with his front arc the whole game, while my AFs kept hitting him with red dice (while busy running over mines) .

Caveat: I actually lost the game after my Awings committed collective suicide and his ISDs ran away from Ackbar

I'm not saying that 2-ship list's aren't viable, just that I find them very limiting.

I was also at Shmitty's tournament, and - incidentally - flew just two ships and a good number of squadrons. It's worth noting that #2 at the tournament (Commodore Naboobo2000) also flew a list with more activations (4 ships).

I went from a 3-Vic carrier list at a tournament two weeks earlier to a 2-Imp carrier list because I felt my Victories (even with Motti) were just too mortal and did not pump out enough damage. Since I went from 2nd place to 5th place, I somewhat regret my decision. The fact that this was a store championship may have increased the competitiveness, but I think that the two events were fairly equivalent - it was mostly the same people with similar lists.

There was also just one Raider.

I'm not sure a 4:8 Rebel:Empire ratio is what I would consider an even split.

The victory tokens were indeed a thing. I played Superior Positions all three rounds, and racked up 9 and 15 tokens in the first two games. In the last game, I just didn't get around my opponent, but blasted him on his front in order not to waste time.

My 2 ship list did fine. It came down to me making a mistake which cost me game 2. If not for that I would have played against shmitty.

My 2 ship list did fine. It came down to me making a mistake which cost me game 2. If not for that I would have played against shmitty.

That may be, but that was a match against another 2-ship list, as was your third match. In other words, it's not a test of how good a 2-ship list is against any given 3+ list is with an admiral of similar skill.

My 2 ship list did fine. It came down to me making a mistake which cost me game 2. If not for that I would have played against shmitty.

That may be, but that was a match against another 2-ship list, as was your third match. In other words, it's not a test of how good a 2-ship list is against any given 3+ list is with an admiral of similar skill.

There is the fact that I took down a 3 ship list from the same person I lost too at the tournament 2 weeks prior. It was a good game but this time I was playing with a list I knew well and knew what it could take and what it could not.

My 2 ship list did fine. It came down to me making a mistake which cost me game 2. If not for that I would have played against shmitty.

That may be, but that was a match against another 2-ship list, as was your third match. In other words, it's not a test of how good a 2-ship list is against any given 3+ list is with an admiral of similar skill.

And the times I faced you with the 2 ship list? Or the tournament prior?

Those maybe, but you're talking about this one.

My 2 ship list did fine. It came down to me making a mistake which cost me game 2. If not for that I would have played against shmitty.

That may be, but that was a match against another 2-ship list, as was your third match. In other words, it's not a test of how good a 2-ship list is against any given 3+ list is with an admiral of similar skill.

And the times I faced you with the 2 ship list? Or the tournament prior?

Those maybe, but you're talking about this one.

Please note that speed control is just as important as the amount of ships. If you know how to counter mass ship lists you can do a lot

My 2 ship list did fine. It came down to me making a mistake which cost me game 2. If not for that I would have played against shmitty.

That may be, but that was a match against another 2-ship list, as was your third match. In other words, it's not a test of how good a 2-ship list is against any given 3+ list is with an admiral of similar skill.

And the times I faced you with the 2 ship list? Or the tournament prior?

Those maybe, but you're talking about this one.

My game 1 should have been different then.

Please note that speed control is just as important as the amount of ships. If you know how to counter mass ship lists you can do a lot

There are many aspects that are 'just as important' or even more important. I don't think anyone is making the counter point. The OP's point is that 2-ship builds may not be the most effective formation ceteris paribus.

Also, Henry was clearly not on his game this last Saturday.

My 2 ship list did fine. It came down to me making a mistake which cost me game 2. If not for that I would have played against shmitty.

That may be, but that was a match against another 2-ship list, as was your third match. In other words, it's not a test of how good a 2-ship list is against any given 3+ list is with an admiral of similar skill.

And the times I faced you with the 2 ship list? Or the tournament prior?

Those maybe, but you're talking about this one.

My game 1 should have been different then.

Please note that speed control is just as important as the amount of ships. If you know how to counter mass ship lists you can do a lot

There are many aspects that are 'just as important' or even more important. I don't think anyone is making the counter point. The OP's point is that 2-ship builds may not be the most effective formation ceteris paribus.

Also, Henry was clearly not on his game this last Saturday.

There are many aspects that are 'just as important' or even more important. I don't think anyone is making the counter point. The OP's point is that 2-ship builds may not be the most effective formation ceteris paribus.

You can keep focusing on just last week but we have played several times with various lists and I have proven that 2 ship list a do work. They require a certain style of play and foreknowledge that takes lots of practice to master. However ISD 2's with Vader statistically average 8 damage at medium range (this has been proven over 100 rolls), combined with XI7 Turbolasers and Gunnery Teams and you make up for your weakness in activations with incredibly devastating shots.

Your list is indeed a strong one, and you combine it with good skill, which is your own.

But, again, Shmitty is making a ceteris paribus argument. All other things equal, 2-ship lists may suffer a general disadvantage compared to lists with more activations, even if the two ships in question are individually stronger or exist in combination with a large squadron contingent.

In my particular circumstance, in these two last tournaments, I think I would have been better off bringing the 3 VSDs again. I don't know if I would have defeated 'The Vile Traitor' again (he learned that running over an asteroid was not a good thing), rather than having suffered a loss from him the way I did in this last tournament, but it's possible.

We'll have to watch tournament results to see how well 2-ship lists do. Thus far, there are a few recent tournament results in which 2-ship lists are placing, so you might be right and Shmitty might be wrong. Perhaps we're entering the 2-ship meta.

I need to make a trip to Portland just to play you, Lyraeus. It would be interesting.

PortlEndor is a cool place. I love visiting - maybe I'll bring down my Armada stuff for a match with some of ya'll if I make it down this summer.

Ceteris paribus. . .I feel like I'm in a debate class.

I went to a store championship as well. Only four people, but it was an even split Reb/Imp, three lists with three ships and very light fighter cover, one dual ISD list with a few fighters. No repeats on admirals (Screed, Motti, Akbar, Dodonna).

I had an ISD, VSD and GSD. Managed to get a 7/3 against an MC80/AF/Neb-B list. Second round was against an MC80/AF/AF Akbar list. Ended up in a head-to-head scrum in the center where neither could maneuver. Should have been ideal, but we ended up crashing in the right position for him to double-arc me the entire time. A flubbed roll on my side let his AF chip away at my ISD for Home One to blow it up. And bad positioning got my GSD side arced by the MC80 and AF turn two.

There are many aspects that are 'just as important' or even more important. I don't think anyone is making the counter point. The OP's point is that 2-ship builds may not be the most effective formation ceteris paribus.

You can keep focusing on just last week but we have played several times with various lists and I have proven that 2 ship list a do work. They require a certain style of play and foreknowledge that takes lots of practice to master. However ISD 2's with Vader statistically average 8 damage at medium range (this has been proven over 100 rolls), combined with XI7 Turbolasers and Gunnery Teams and you make up for your weakness in activations with incredibly devastating shots.

Your list is indeed a strong one, and you combine it with good skill, which is your own.

But, again, Shmitty is making a ceteris paribus argument. All other things equal, 2-ship lists may suffer a general disadvantage compared to lists with more activations, even if the two ships in question are individually stronger or exist in combination with a large squadron contingent.

In my particular circumstance, in these two last tournaments, I think I would have been better off bringing the 3 VSDs again. I don't know if I would have defeated 'The Vile Traitor' again (he learned that running over an asteroid was not a good thing), rather than having suffered a loss from him the way I did in this last tournament, but it's possible.

We'll have to watch tournament results to see how well 2-ship lists do. Thus far, there are a few recent tournament results in which 2-ship lists are placing, so you might be right and Shmitty might be wrong. Perhaps we're entering the 2-ship meta.

Yes more activations and speed will mean that the high activation list can tease my 2 activations out, however that won't last forever. When they do get into my range I will be able to pounce. This will be due to speed control.

On the topic of many ships vs. few ships, I see two specific cases where it really hurts you badly to run two ships:

1. When you go second against a very aggressive list with more activations. The double demolisher activation is still lethal even to things like ISDs, and it's a good way to lose a ship without being able to respond. See Clontroper's list in the Vassal tournament, for example.
2. When you go first against a long range manuever list with a lot more activations. You will rarely/never get good shots, and they will eat you for lunch at distance. Perhaps the extreme of this would be nothing but TRC CR90s.

These are, given equivalent player skill, hard counters for most two ship lists. That's why I expect, in the long run, they will prove to not work.

Now, a 3 big ship list...

Edit: On the topic of what Lyraeus said above, this works until you hit someone with a genuine movement advantage. Again, Clontroper's list is a good example. You are getting, at most, a single shot at Demolisher before it rolls in, fires once, then activates first and fires twice, then moves way. Whatever it was shooting at is probably dead. Even an ISD or MC80.

I do think that 2 ship lists can work, but there is a known, serious disadvantage to them that you have to overcome. I know how to manipulate activations to control the flow of the game, so for me multiple ships are really important. That's a big reason why I showed up with 5 ships in my fleet.

So, my original point was more one of surprise that half of the fleets at the tournament were only 2 ships. It made me wonder if I had missed something or was overestimating the value of having multiple activationss. One tournament is way too small of a sample size to make any kind of conclusion, but i will be curious to observe what other tournaments have show up.

I do think that 2 ship lists can work, but there is a known, serious disadvantage to them that you have to overcome. I know how to manipulate activations to control the flow of the game, so for me multiple ships are really important. That's a big reason why I showed up with 5 ships in my fleet.

So, my original point was more one of surprise that half of the fleets at the tournament were only 2 ships. It made me wonder if I had missed something or was overestimating the value of having multiple activationss. One tournament is way too small of a sample size to make any kind of conclusion, but i will be curious to observe what other tournaments have show up.

For my 2 ship lists, since the majority of the firepower is coming from squadrons, I do believe the range issue is at least mitigated- when I run double fatties of either side, I'm counting on them primarily running away while the squaddies do the heavy lifting- it's just that I'm expecting that when/if my opponent catches up, they will have been beaten and bruised quite a bit. If they have enough squadrons to blow up mine, that probably means they don't have so many ships/have very squishy ships such that I will ignore them and go for the throat. Or, I end up losing. Really bad. That happens too...

I had 5 squadrons but the 2 ship list worked because of Gunnery Teams and XI7 Turbolasers.

At 400 points, two ship lists really need very heavy squadron support. a 4-5 ship list with initiative is at a considerable advantage in how it attacks you.

Now, knowing that, I tend to assume I won't get initiative and plan accordingly.

Two MC-80's or 2 ISD's can work, I tend to bring YT-2400's with the MC-80's and Firespray/Aggressors with the ISD's.

I use Rogues as my commands are far better spent on engineering or navigate than commanding squads. (not that I won't if it proves opportune)

Good objectives for 2 ship lists tend to be Advanced Gunnery, Contested Outposts and Minefields.

My gut is, that over time, 2 ship lists will fall away a fair amount as the tactics are a bit 2 dimensional and will become easy to counter.

I don't think 2 ship lists are 2 dimensional. They take a special way of thinking to fly right. They also take a ton of experience