Give it to me in percentages.

How much of each contributes to victory on the table top?

Elaborate as much as you like.

I am using the term Fleet Deployment in place of Skill because its aesthetically pleasing.

Fleet Composition is what you put in your list, how it's intended to be used and what Objectives you pair it with.

Fleet Deployment covers how well you push the list, counter your opponent, and Objective play.

I'll start. I think a commander impacts his Fleet more than a Fleet impacts the commander. So at minimum I feel 30% Fleet Composition and 70% Fleet Deployment.

Lets hear YOUR takes!!!

I think I see what you're saying. If I may break it down further, I think winning is 30% list building/fleet composition, 30% deploying your fleet, 30% maneuvering ships during the game, and 10% dice. This is of course abstract and due to zero actual math.

20% fleet building, 30% deployment, 40% manuever, 10% dice.

I dont think I could give you percentages. I think it always sort of depends. Deployment is always extremely important, and if two lists are more or less equally suited to fighting each other, its almost 100 percent the most important thing. But if for whatever reason one list skews heavily, and the opposing list is built in such a way as to take serious advantage of that, then composition becomes a more determining factor.

Look at clons game vs jj. The fact that clon could last-first was probably the single most important factor in the game.

20% fleet building, 30% deployment, 40% manuever, 10% dice.

No fair adding other stuff!

@Caldias et al: I'm rolling initial deployment and game play into Fleet Deployment on this...ya know, all the choices at the game table outside of Fleet Composition (list/build).

Sure, I understand and am completely in line with your thinking, just figured I'd break down a little more. I agree completely that list building is kind of a small facet. Kind of funny when you see how many rate-my-list posts there are and not many how-should-I-deploy posts. I agree that it is about 30% list building/pregame and 70% playing the game.

95% List Building
5% actually playing the game......

... wait, wait. You weren't asking me how much time I spend on each of those things...

Okay, ignore that.

Honestly, before I hit the table, I think what happens there is about 25% of the overall strategy. It does boil down to the big decisions. Ships/Squadrons, BigShips/Swarms, etc etc. They do play a part in interpreting the potentials of opponents.

The rest is turning a piece-of-crap list into something Golden on the Tabletop... I fail more than I succeed, which probably means I actually consider a 25/75 split an ideal and my Mouth is still writing Cheques my Play cannot Cash...

80% Fleet Deployment
20% Fleet Composition

I would go lower for Fleet Composition but there are some bad choices that can affect the game. Perhaps you miscalculate the meta and take a list with no squadrons or take Ackbar in a list of Nebulons. If you bring paper and your opponent bring scissors it is always going to be a hard game.

Otherwise, fleet composition doesn't account for too much: My 400 points will generally be a good match for your 400 points.

List building to me is not the end all be all.

This game is like Netrunner in the fact that you can work around not having things and if you are skilled at your list and know how to handle your opponents list you can pull wins out.

Now Versch is going with top table so let's say both players are even in skill in which case list building matters a bit more (though. . . I have yet to find a top table with equal skill. . . Usually one of the players is better or has had more practice. . .)

I think 25% is the list (the game balance mies almost any list that makes top table a possible winner), 25% deployment, 20% Objective (at least in my play style), and 35% maneuvering (speed control!)

I personally think this varies from list to list, so overall I rate Fleet composition higher then most, like 35% 65%

But there are extreme cases where the match is all but determined in the list builds phase, an excellent example is my World cup fleet, in that particular instance I think the games are more 60% fleet comp and 40% deployment.

I also think the plan before the game is very important kinda like your pregame prep I guess

A more in depth breakdown for me is:

20% list building

15% game plan

25% deployment phase

30% maneuver and gameplay

10% Dice luck

It's more about how you use the forces you bring to the table that contributes to success than what you actually bring.

It's more about how you use the forces you bring to the table that contributes to success than what you actually bring.

This type of vague numbers game is the perfect exmaple of over reliance on statistics and wanting to reduce a strategic game to such. The percentages we are meant to guess at will never be quantifiable, therefore it is usless to discuss. Even if we have a number what does that even translate into?

I prefer tangible ideas. Think about your stratergy, how it relates to the Objectives, their fleet, how you loose/gain advantage from choosing, what facing one way with a Ship will gain you as oppossed to another.

Curve ball. How about some games when deployment means nothing but sometimes it means everything?

What about Composition? Do you hate pick, play what you know and you deploy to neuter advantage, try something new?

We could amble on forever and never find a number!

It's more about how you use the forces you bring to the table that contributes to success than what you actually bring.

Hence my comment but the ideology is that at top table the level of skill is equal

The man is expressing his opinion. This isn't a competition about who said what, or meant what, first.

If fifty people feel the same way about something, I'd like to see it expressed fifty times. Thats how a survey works.

@Versch : I think your ballparks figures of 30% to 70% (for deployment) are about correct from my experience. I would include Turn 1 activation order as well within the Fleet Deployment part (because they set up most of the rest of the battle).

To go even further, I would say that I see that Fleet Composition is a "dissatisfier" and Fleet Deployment a "satisfier". As in, optimal list building is marginally more efficient than a less optimally built list, but it's easy to start at a disadvantage. But Deployment and T1 commands are what sets you up for Victory.

I remember an epic fail performance of mine in a tournament in Wave 1 where I fielded 2 Neb Bs, an AFMK2 A and Dutch Wedge back in the days. The list itself wasn't very efficient, but the way I played it was abysmal and it allowed me to hand 2 10-0 after my bye. But the point was, having a list that lacked teeth drove me into making some huge mistakes in deployment and early turns which cost me the two games.

I personally think this varies from list to list, so overall I rate Fleet composition higher then most, like 35% 65%

But there are extreme cases where the match is all but determined in the list builds phase, an excellent example is my World cup fleet, in that particular instance I think the games are more 60% fleet comp and 40% deployment.

I also think the plan before the game is very important kinda like your pregame prep I guess

A more in depth breakdown for me is:

20% list building

15% game plan

25% deployment phase

30% maneuver and gameplay

10% Dice luck

I'd agree, for me at least I feel like list composition is important. Partly because it affects how I maneuver (GSDs vs. VSDs), how many strategies are available to me (and not just combat strategies, but also things like flexibility in objective choices, first vs. second player, etc.), and how I match up with the opponent. Not to say that you can't win if your opponent can maneuver better than you, has more strategies available than you, or matches up badly with you, but those things all make victory a little easier or more difficult, and your ceiling on all of them will be set to a large extent by the composition of the list. If you run triple MC-80s with no engine techs, and hit an ISD-Demolisher-Raider-Raider list with a Rhymer ball, you'll have trouble with certain objectives (Intel Sweep springs to mind, perhaps Superior Positions, others as well). Again, not saying you couldn't win under those circumstances, but degree of difficulty can certainly be affected.

I also feel like list composition can also affect many of the other factors/percentages listed above.

• Game plan: A more flexible all-comers list increases your game plan options. The biggest factors that affect my game plans are, in some order, opponent's fleet composition, objective choice, first vs. second player, and terrain (obstacle/objective layout). None of those four things are set-in-stone until the match begins (except perhaps first vs. second player, if you know you have the biggest bid in a tournament and know you always want one over the other), so building a fleet that can have different game plans--even if you have a preferred plan--helps when things don't go as expected. See world championships.
• Deployment: Lots of ships and fighters = better chance at making more deployment decisions after your opponent (absent objectives like Superior Positions or Fleet Ambush)--see world championships. Fewer ships/squadrons does exactly the opposite. You still have to deploy them well, but part of deploying "well" means deploying with as much information as possible about your enemy's location (when that first unit hits the table, you typically won't know whether it's deployed "well" or "badly" until later in the phase). Unless the objective choice changes things, that's directly related to fleet building.
• Maneuver and gameplay: Again, the ceiling is limited by list building choices. Vic spam = little maneuverability unless I spam navs, but lots more board control than Raider spam (talking pure space, not damage potential). Neb spam plays very differently than AFII spam. Choice of commanders has a tremendous impact on how a game plays out, affects how you maneuver (Mon Mothma ships in black vs. blue range, anyone? Rieekan???) Clon's thread on threat range suggests that, assuming equal skill in maneuvering by both opponents, the choice of ship (and upgrades) that one is maneuvering can make a big difference in damage output and zone control.
• Dice luck: For anyone who's been following our thread on Vader (which has broadened into a thread on reroll builds and strategies generally), certain fleet builds can also take a lot of the luck out of dice rolls (or, perhaps more accurately, reduce your odds at "bad" luck and boost your odds at "good" luck). If you're like me and are more risk-adverse (or just have bad luck), and want to get more consistency out of your battle performance, there are ways you can build towards that, too.

So all that to say, while I feel the "fleet build" itself doesn't guarantee a win, it has an affect on the ceiling of the other percentages we're talking about. If this boost is taken into account, I feel like the total contribution added by careful list building can be as much as 50%, because it makes the other aspects of the game easier or harder. For me, that underscores just how holistic this game is.

Just my two cents.

I would include Turn 1 activation order as well within the Fleet Deployment part (because they set up most of the rest of the battle).

Agree 100% with this - IMO a good example of this is the World's Final last year where the Imperial player's deployment made it very hard for him to make best use of his fleet.

For me: List building in Armada is all about choosing the tools you want to use, but *how* you choose to use them will determine the game (dice allowing)

I'd go for: 20% List, 30% Deployment, 40% In Game, 10% Dice

I'll add more voice the the sub-parts. I've lost games and won games based solely on poor deployment phase placements and speeds by whoever lost. Those mistakes are much harder to recover from, especially if it gives your opponent an objective advantage.

Squadron tactics are also starting to differentiate good players from great players. With both factions having very viable squadron builds, there's a lot of gameplay decision-making that is non-obvious at a glance.

As usual, there are more than just one way to look at this. Do we ask "where is the % that the game swings based on this factor against any opponents" or "where is the % that the game swings based on this factor against high level play?"

If we are talking high level play, I think it goes something like this:

Fleet Building 20% - Building your own fleet or your opponent building there's to beat the META

Deployment - 45% - this is where I see a lot of games won and lost. It is VERY easy to make a mistake here that is unrecoverable, or only can be with exceptional luck

Mental Errors / Suboptimal Play - 20% - During game play sometimes you just screw up. If your opponent is playing a perfect game, that is it for you.

Dumb Luck - 15% - Sometimes the dice really do hate you. Can be higher or lower based on the list built, and how much it relies on high variance dice.

I would say...

5% List composition and synergy with objectives

5% Initiative "choice"

10% Psychology (this is often over looked. If people perceive you as good...you will do better)

10% Deployment of obstacles and objectives choices and placement

10% Fleet Deployment

20% Current game maneuvering

40% Prior practice with the list you are fielding

Dice aren't a factor. There is no such thing as luck. Good players will minimize and maximize their probability appropriately.

I would say...

5% List composition and synergy with objectives

5% Initiative "choice"

10% Psychology (this is often over looked. If people perceive you as good...you will do better)

10% Deployment of obstacles and objectives choices and placement

10% Fleet Deployment

20% Current game maneuvering

40% Prior practice with the list you are fielding

Dice aren't a factor. There is no such thing as luck. Good players will minimize and maximize their probability appropriately.

I don't think it is accurate to say dice are not a factor. Just because statistically it becomes a wash doesn't mean some rolls are much more important than others. And the luck plays into WHEN you get the good rolls vs bad. No amount of minimizing and maximizing probability can stop you from having an improbably bad or good string of rolls. If dice were not a factor this game would be called Checkers.

I think Fleet Building is actually pretty big part of this. Some people might consider that a strike against the game, but I don't think it is. The game is pointed in such a way that you really can't have "everything you need", but you really do need to diversify.

If you go up against someone packing a lot of Xi7's, and all you brought are VICs/MC-30's...you're really going to struggle. If you brought Neb B's against someone using Heavy Turbolasers, you're going to have a challenge. If you brought lots of dedicated anti-squadron stuff, and you're opponent is going with no squadrons, you have potentially wasted points.

And the challenge with this game, is that it's very hard to build a list with a little bit of everything AND still be able to groove with your Commander AND still be able to play to all the various possible objective cards.

I put fleet building at 30% for these reasons.

Deployment is huge. A lot of people have said "navigation" but they are really kind of the same thing, or at least, navigation is an extension of deployment. Deployment determines all the navigation options you will have throughout the game, with a few rare exceptions like CR90's, or Glads with engine techs. But deployment also is concerned with things like "how many drops" do I have, and "Can I stall my opponent out to see where his big stuff is going"

I put deployment at 30%.

In game Navigation: 20%

Battle Plan, aka, Synergizing with the chosen objective card: 10% This is an extension of your list building. You need to have a list which can capitalize on your chosen missions, or at least not succumb horribly to the wrong mission.

Dice: 10%. Possibly a little higher, I think we've all experienced a game where 1 more accuracy token or 1 more hit would have killed off a ship that otherwise got away. You can't downplay how important a single die roll can be in these game, even though I'm sure we'd all like this to not be the case.

How I wins matches.

30% of throwing ship cards in the air and picking the ones that land face up.

70% Blind luck.

100% Style

I do not win matches often.

I'm going with:

33.33% Fleet Composition

66.66% Fleet Deployment

So about a third for the makeup of your fleet and two-thirds for how you run it as an admiral.