So played a practice game with a buddy tonight, and he really scored big on the bonus points from "Superior Positions"

I just want to make sure we are doing this right, so please check the following scenario:

-if a bomber (or a ship, for that matter), attacks in the rear hull zone, and the damage is pushed to another hull zone via 'redirect' defense token (and thus, no damage cards are dealt, and no damage to the rear hull zone is received) does the attacker still receive an objective token?

On one hand, it seems by the raw to indicate that they would. On the other...it seems really easy to hit in the rear (especially with a heavy bomber / squadron list). But then, maybe that's the point.

" After a ship or squadron performs an attack against the rear hull zone of another ship, if the defender suffers at least one damage, the attackers owner gains one victory token."

- Did you perform an attack against the rear hull zone?

- Was a point of damage suffered?

The answer to both is Yes. If they redirect it, they still suffer the damage, and you still targeted the rear hull zone.

Conversely, if you target a side (or front - Advanced Projectors) hull zone, and the damage is redirected to the rear, you do NOT gain a token.

Again, to get a token the only two requirements that must be met are:

Did you target the rear hull zone?

Did the defender suffer at least one damage?

If the answer to either of those is "no", you don't get a token.

And dealing damage only counts hits that get through to the hull. Damage to shields doesn't count.

And dealing damage only counts hits that get through to the hull. Damage to shields doesn't count.

RRG 4 -- DAMAGE

Ships and squadrons can suffer damage from attacks,

obstacles, and other game effects.

• When a ship suffers damage, it suffers that damage one

point at a time. For each point, reduce the shields in the

defending hull zone by one. If the defending hull zone

has no shields to lose, deal a facedown damage card to

the ship instead.

And dealing damage only counts hits that get through to the hull. Damage to shields doesn't count.

Not true. Damage to shields is still taking damage.

RRG 4 -- DAMAGE

Ships and squadrons can suffer damage from attacks,

obstacles, and other game effects.

• When a ship suffers damage, it suffers that damage one

point at a time. For each point, reduce the shields in the

defending hull zone by one. If the defending hull zone

has no shields to lose, deal a facedown damage card to

the ship instead.

Yep. So don't take this objective if your opponent has ANY squadrons with black dice. A Rhymerball in the butt can easily net 60-75pts per turn without actually killing anything. And that's just a small one of four or five. I have a list with ten black-die squadrons, so that's 150pts from a single round of shooting.

Yes, that is exactly what I learned tonight. He had 4 firesprays, Rhymer and 2 buddy bombers. He scored 11 objective tokens over the whole game. (165) pts.

Need to shoot at squadrons

Okay I learned something new. Time for me to go back and remove this from my fleet lists. This is another example of why I like taking part in this site

Need to shoot at squadrons

I did. I had 2 X wings and 2 YT-2400's. You would not believe the amount of crits my squadrons rolled. I kid you not I had 3 engagements I can think of where 4 blue dice turned up not a single hit. 1 Firespray with 1 hull left survived at least 3 different rounds of something or someone shooting at him (ship or squadron)

Okay I learned something new. Time for me to go back and remove this from my fleet lists. This is another example of why I like taking part in this site

Remove what? Superior positions? Lol. You better have a bomber oriented fleet that can pound the hell out of someone's pooper if you're going to include it.

Need to shoot at squadrons

I did. I had 2 X wings and 2 YT-2400's. You would not believe the amount of crits my squadrons rolled. I kid you not I had 3 engagements I can think of where 4 blue dice turned up not a single hit. 1 Firespray with 1 hull left survived at least 3 different rounds of something or someone shooting at him (ship or squadron)

Okay I learned something new. Time for me to go back and remove this from my fleet lists. This is another example of why I like taking part in this site

Remove what? Superior positions? Lol. You better have a bomber oriented fleet that can pound the hell out of someone's pooper if you're going to include it.

I also run Precision Strike as well with few to no bombers.

There are no "squadron centric" objectives. That is a classification that is given by people but it limits their understanding of how the objective can be used.

For instance, I run Superior Positions in my All Neb Fleet because those side arcs are so huge and the rear arc is so narrow that it is nearly impossible to get a rear shot unless you are right behind the Nebulon-B.

Precision Strike is an objective I learned to love abusing back in wave 1 where people would spend their crits on Assault Concussion Missiles. Since then I have not had very many games with less than 8 VP tokens

Need to shoot at squadrons

I did. I had 2 X wings and 2 YT-2400's. You would not believe the amount of crits my squadrons rolled. I kid you not I had 3 engagements I can think of where 4 blue dice turned up not a single hit. 1 Firespray with 1 hull left survived at least 3 different rounds of something or someone shooting at him (ship or squadron)

Did you use your Ships anti-squadron attacks?

On occasion, but my ships in this list were all single blue die. (MC30's and CR90's). They shot when it made sense to shoot, but really that game the blue squadron dice did not average out. I think if I played my list 10 times, it would show I had enough squadron dice to lock down a bomber-centric threat list.

Okay I learned something new. Time for me to go back and remove this from my fleet lists. This is another example of why I like taking part in this site

Remove what? Superior positions? Lol. You better have a bomber oriented fleet that can pound the hell out of someone's pooper if you're going to include it.

I include it and I don't run a bomber fleet.

I also run Precision Strike as well with few to no bombers.

There are no "squadron centric" objectives. That is a classification that is given by people but it limits their understanding of how the objective can be used.

For instance, I run Superior Positions in my All Neb Fleet because those side arcs are so huge and the rear arc is so narrow that it is nearly impossible to get a rear shot unless you are right behind the Nebulon-B.

Squadrons don't care how super-model-tiny your hiney is, Lyr, they'll find a way to get in there if your opponent is doing his thing correctly. (I'm not saying it's a slam dunk, mind you; if you got what you need to shut down his bombers, you can defend properly. I'm just saying the Neb-B's narrow rear arc by itself is not adequate protection.) Last night my opponent scored 11 objectives, but I don't think a single shot (that resulted in an objective token) came from a ship; certainly not more than 1 or 2. He slammed me because his bombers nailed me repeatedly in the pooper, and i couldn't get blue squadron shots to save my life.

That being said, I agree with your larger point, which is that it's not necessarily a squadron-centric objective.

I would argue that Superior Positions is very much squadron-centric. You can definitely include it if you don't have tons of squadrons. After all, it forces your opponent to deploy first, which can be a huge bonus. And if you have something like a Neb-B or corvette swarm, keeping your opponent out of your rear arc can be an easier thing to do so you don't put yourself at much risk. But you're not going to win a lot of objective tokens with just ships. The cheapest ship you can take is roughly 45 points and can only score two tokens per turn (assuming you double-arc). You either have to circle wide around your opponent's bigger ships or try to blow right past them. The former takes a lot of time, the latter exposes your weak ships to a lot of fire. Forty-five points also translates into five TIE Bombers. These can get behind your ships much faster and score up to five tokens per turn. They're also harder to kill without a fighter screen. Their speed of four and small bases makes it very easy to maneuver behind you, and all they need to do is get behind your Neb-Bs and have a clear shot to your rear arc. They don't have to actually fit into the arc itself.

You can run the objective and be successful without fighters, but it seems to have been designed to synergize with a fighter contingent. Rhymer, two bombers and a Jumpmaster can be activated by a single ship and earn most of their points back (reliably 45) in objectives without even hitting a ship's hull. A stripped-down corvette would take at least two turns staying in the rear arc to total the same.

Okay I learned something new. Time for me to go back and remove this from my fleet lists. This is another example of why I like taking part in this site

Remove what? Superior positions? Lol. You better have a bomber oriented fleet that can pound the hell out of someone's pooper if you're going to include it.

I include it and I don't run a bomber fleet.

I also run Precision Strike as well with few to no bombers.

There are no "squadron centric" objectives. That is a classification that is given by people but it limits their understanding of how the objective can be used.

For instance, I run Superior Positions in my All Neb Fleet because those side arcs are so huge and the rear arc is so narrow that it is nearly impossible to get a rear shot unless you are right behind the Nebulon-B.

Squadrons don't care how super-model-tiny your hiney is, Lyr, they'll find a way to get in there if your opponent is doing his thing correctly. (I'm not saying it's a slam dunk, mind you; if you got what you need to shut down his bombers, you can defend properly. I'm just saying the Neb-B's narrow rear arc by itself is not adequate protection.) Last night my opponent scored 11 objectives, but I don't think a single shot (that resulted in an objective token) came from a ship; certainly not more than 1 or 2. He slammed me because his bombers nailed me repeatedly in the pooper, and i couldn't get blue squadron shots to save my life.

That being said, I agree with your larger point, which is that it's not necessarily a squadron-centric objective.

This is why I mitigate squadrons when I play against my opponents with this objective. My Vader Duet list does this remarkably well. My opponent could take the time to attack my ship but then Mithel will kill his bombers when combines with my ships and other squadrons. The Joys of Dengar.

It all comes down to build and play. Experience on knowing how to maneuver with what can and what wont work is key with this objective and Precision Strike.

I think the average tokens I get on a game of superior positions when my opponent picks it, is 8 and that is with about 5 to 7 squadrons.

I would argue that Superior Positions is very much squadron-centric. You can definitely include it if you don't have tons of squadrons. After all, it forces your opponent to deploy first, which can be a huge bonus. And if you have something like a Neb-B or corvette swarm, keeping your opponent out of your rear arc can be an easier thing to do so you don't put yourself at much risk. But you're not going to win a lot of objective tokens with just ships. The cheapest ship you can take is roughly 45 points and can only score two tokens per turn (assuming you double-arc). You either have to circle wide around your opponent's bigger ships or try to blow right past them. The former takes a lot of time, the latter exposes your weak ships to a lot of fire. Forty-five points also translates into five TIE Bombers. These can get behind your ships much faster and score up to five tokens per turn. They're also harder to kill without a fighter screen. Their speed of four and small bases makes it very easy to maneuver behind you, and all they need to do is get behind your Neb-Bs and have a clear shot to your rear arc. They don't have to actually fit into the arc itself.

You can run the objective and be successful without fighters, but it seems to have been designed to synergize with a fighter contingent. Rhymer, two bombers and a Jumpmaster can be activated by a single ship and earn most of their points back (reliably 45) in objectives without even hitting a ship's hull. A stripped-down corvette would take at least two turns staying in the rear arc to total the same.

You can argue it and while it is partially true it is a limiting concept.

Each player will use the objective differently and will understand how they work differently. That is something I like about this game. However one can not put a limiting concept as "squadron-centric"

Intel Sweep was believed to be only a Rebel objective for the longest time when it came out but WWPDSteven found a way to make speed 2 ships work with that objective. I have pushed Precision Strike as not just a squadron objective and that is gaining a lot of ground. It is all about perspective and a willingness to test the boundaries.

Listening to you just makes me wish I had about 14 more hours a week to play Armada. :-(

Listening to you just makes me wish I had about 14 more hours a week to play Armada. :-(

Yea. I cant say it is a suffrage but I volunteer at a game store by playing games and bringing people into the wargaming community for Armada and Dropzone Commander. I do this 2 days a week per game so I get in about 2 to 4 games at least a week.

This is why I mitigate squadrons when I play against my opponents with this objective. My Vader Duet list does this remarkably well. My opponent could take the time to attack my ship but then Mithel will kill his bombers when combines with my ships and other squadrons. The Joys of Dengar.

It all comes down to build and play. Experience on knowing how to maneuver with what can and what wont work is key with this objective and Precision Strike.

I think the average tokens I get on a game of superior positions when my opponent picks it, is 8 and that is with about 5 to 7 squadrons.

Lyr, not to be pedantic here, but...

...if the best way to score rear shots on ships (tiny hiney or not) is via squadrons...

AND...

...the best way to shut down those rear shots are with opposing squadrons

THAN...

Do we not consider this a primarily squadron-centric objective? (either for the person selecting it, hoping it gets picked, or the person not selecting, because he doesn't have squadrons)

Edit: Let me go about inquiring another way. If I bring a no-squadron list (regardless of the inherent wisdom in that decision), should I bring the Superior Objectives card with me as part of my army? Probably not. If I also have no-squadrons (and/or, poor AA ship chassis), should I choose my opponents Superior Objectives card? Probably not, unless it's the best of the 3. ( And if Superior Objectives IS the best of the 3 for your no-squadron ship list, you probably need to go back to Armada list building 101)

I have! In only a few lists though. I have seen Ackbar lists use it to great effect.

It will come down to experience and expectations.

This is a bit of a semantic discussion. Or rather, a discussion on the actual definition of the word without defining said definition. Because "Squadron-Centric" can mean a different thing for different people.

For some, it may mean "Focused around rewarding Squadrons."

For some, it may mean "Specifically Designed for Squadrons."

For some, it may mean "Ships do not Benefit from it, only Squadrons."

And I am sure there are further definitions to be had. Unless you define that variable , we're going to have a back-and-forth argument with absolutely no merit other than to beat chests and call out your position as the correct one.

But until you define that variable, no-one can be technically correct .

For me, I don't see it as an excluseively squadron list... Especially since my Rebel Squadrons were punished handily by a 7 TRC player after they picked that objective from my collection...

It rewards excellent play one way or another. Properly maneuvering squadrons is just one facet of excellent play , as is maneuvering Ships, especially when you are doing so against someone who is doing their damndest to properly maneuvering squadrons.

I'm sure you're correct, Dras.

Here's my definition: if someone is going to ask "what kind of list works well with the 'Superior Positions' objective card, it probably means they are not up to the level of experience that you or Lyraeus is, in which case, answering "A squadron centric list" is likely a good, reasonable, and, in the context of their Armada experience, a true answer.

I'm sure you're correct, Dras.

Here's my definition: if someone is going to ask "what kind of list works well with the 'Superior Positions' objective card, it probably means they are not up to the level of experience that you or Lyraeus is, in which case, answering "A squadron centric list" is likely a good, reasonable, and, in the context of their Armada experience, a true answer.

I am a horrible persona and tell that they can make it work if they try.

Well that or "you will have to play with it and find what it works best for you"

Normally Superior Positions is my Catch all objective. I stick away from Minefields and Dangerous Territories.

I've found in the ackbar meta that, squadrons or not, I depend on superior positions. In competitive play, I have been running a fireball with two ISDs, using precision strike and fire lanes. NOBODY wants to select fire lanes, and few want to try precision strike (though, I've found, against rebels it is a detriment to me to turn over cards rather than doing extra damage, in most cases), so they choose superior positions. This makes it quite easy for me to set up my ISDs on an intercept course so I can lock down the dangerous ships in a game of bumper-cars that I will win.