Ok, reports:

First Game:

221 - Aceholes core (Me)

Nebulon-B Escort // Rieekan / Yavaris / Flight Commander / Fighter Coordination Team
GR-75 Transport // Hondo / Bomber command Center
GR-75 Transport // Comms Net

Norra
2x B-Wing
1x A-Wing
Wedge

vs

Opponent 1: 225

...Jamming Barrier....

Quasar Fire // Stronghold...
Raider-I // External Racks...
Gozanti Cruiser // ...

Various TIEs...

I chose initiative, we chose jamming barrier. By the game end I had eliminated the Raider and most of his TIEs with Wedge as the sole loss. We didn't begin the engagement until about turn 4 as both of us were playing cautiously. It was enjoyable- though I ended up losing only Wedge really, it was kind of close since he had enough TIEs to lock down my fighters if my opponent decided to take advantage of my missteps in play.

-------------------------

Me - 224
Opening Salvo - Fighter Ambush - Superior Positions

Arquitens CL // Darth Vader / Intel Officer / Slaved Turrets
Arquitens CL // Intel Officer / Slaved Turrets

3x Firespray

-Vs-

Opponent two : 225

....Solar Corona...

Liberty Star Cruiser // Skilled First Officer / Engineering Team / Garm Bel Iblis
Liberty Star Cruiser // Skilled First Officer

Having two star bruisers crush a lot of things in their path is cause for concern, but here I was able to take some advantages with the ARQs I've been building spitting fire at maximum range and an Intel officer... with three rogue bombers. My opponent wasn't adventurous with his cruisers- he didn't want to fly off the board- and as a result I was able to pummel him at long range and get some supporting shots in with the Firesprays. I had to navigate all the way down to ensure my cruisers weren't stuck in bad maneuvers either, but Soloar Corona only subtracted a few dice, and I was able to threaten the liberty's redirects in spite of firing into the sun. Really, the FIresprays did most of the work, since they were unopposed and on more than one occasion only one ARQ was able to fire each turn.

I think if my opponent banked more navigation commands, it would have been bad for me. His conservative play ended up giving me the advantage.

--------------------------

Last week I had nobody show up- so I pulled out some of my Star Trek test stuff and ran it against the ARQ CL list above. Both games swung in different directions- in one, the ARQs blew up the Trek ships easily. In the other, the photon torpedo upgrade single-handedly demolished the ARQs. The objective was opening salvo, which in retrospect may not have been the best idea.

We got three games in this afternoon in the span of three hours!

----------------------------------

We've been doing this standard of obstacle play: Two asteroids (of the choice of the player), one debris field (either one) and the station. It's what's outlined in the OP, it's been working well.

Game 1: Norse vs Aaron.

Norse // 224

Opening Salvo - Fighter Ambush - Superior Positions

ARQ-CL // Intel Officer / Slaved Turrets / Vader
ARQ-CL // Intel Officer / Slaved Turrets / Vader

3x Firepsrays

vs

Aaron // 225

VSD // Gunnery Teams / D-Caps / Screed / Skilled First Officer
RDR-I // E-Racks
RDR-II // Overload Pulse

Norse as first player. Close Range Intel Scan selected.

Turn 3: Raider-I
Turn 4: Raider-II
Turn 5: Vader's ARQ, VSD.

Another outing of the ARQ battery permutation. It's games like this that make me hard to be persuaded Raiders can work, since I flew my ARQs close to obstacles, near the Raiders, and annihilated them with Firespray assistance. The only reason I lost Vader is because the VSD's D-Caps did a lot of damage, which Aaron followed up on as he closed. Still didn't help when my last ARQ followed up on Vader's attacks and joined up with the Firesprays. In the end, Aaron split his formation so the RDRs couldn't hit the same time the VSD was in play.

Game 2: Aaron vs Lucas-------------------------------------------------------

Aaron // 225

VSD // Gunnery Teams / D-Caps / Screed / Skilled First Officer
RDR-I // E-Racks
RDR-II // Overload Pulse

vs

Lucas // 218

Quasar-I // Flight Commander / Boosted comms / Admiral Motti
Raider-I // Ordnance Experts / Expanded Racks

Darth Vader
Tempest Squadron
Saber Squadron
Maarek Stele

Lucas with initiative, selects Hyperspace assault.

Turn 2: (VSD Hyperspaces in right behind/between the Quasar and Raider), Raider (Lucas)
Turn 3: Quasar

Lucas is a new player to our region and this was one of his first games, he wasn't aware of how Hyperspace assault worked and it worked against him as a result. One thing to consider is how Hyperspace assault can be kind of punishing on a small table like this- with two dots, you won't be able to have a large area of the map to put between you and the hyper-spacing ship.

Game 3: Norse Vs Lucas ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Norse // 224

VSD-I // Expanded Launchers / Ordnance Experts / XI7 / Support Officer / Motti
VSD-I // Expanded Launchers / Ordnance Experts / XI7 / Skilled First Officer

vs

Lucas // 223

Precision Strike - Superior Positions - Fighter Ambush

Quasar-I // Flight Commander / Boosted Comms / Admiral Motti
Gladiator-I // Demolisher

Darth Vader
Tempest Squadron
Saber Squadron
Maarek Stele

Norse with initiative. Selects Precision strike.

Turn 4: Gladiator
Turn 6: Motti's VSD

Lucas: 124 + 75 in tokens = 199
Norse: 66 + 33 in tokens = 96

I decided to try a crazy list idea of maximum firepower VSDs, trying to destroy both carriers and table my opponent as rapidly as possible. Demolisher was obliterated on the second turn it engaged (double arced by Motti's VSD), but the fleeing Quasar Fire managed to escape my flanking VSD at the expense of not commanding the fighters... which followed Motti's VSD. Combined with two overlaps on a debris field and not scoring one more point of damage on Lucas Motti's Quasar Fire, this was a coincidental game that could have hinged on the VPs Lucas scored in points.

I think it's a testament to the format that it seems to work well enough between the different skills. I don't think there's much of a difference between 225 and 200, but 225 seems good enough to work with for now.

While the format has been working, I have a couple of ideas I want to advance in this format to hone it. The objectives, while familiar, are a bit cumbersome trying to stuff them into a smaller format. In these three games, Hyperspace assault seemed very advantaged to the second player getting to put their tokens where they want to. I would like to propose something to use in place of objectives that make the game interesting, but that is designed for this format and not something that needs errata'd rules to function.

The second idea goes back to that forgotten 'Optional Rules' section of the rulebook that I have hardly seen anyone discuss in the open. How about passing initative between the players on even/odd turns? That way it makes it harder to gurantee a first-last and makes the game more unpredictable.

1. Tactical Objectives

During list construction for Patrol format, do not select objectives.

During setup players draw three random Tactical objective cards. Each objective can be scored by either player during the course of the game, marked with victory tokens placed just off the edge of each card facing the player.

Examples:

Bounty Hunter (2): Score one victory point for each unique card or squadron destroyed during the game.
In the very least, the Commander is a unique card and would count for this condition. Too swingy perhaps, punishing lists with large aces builds and unique characters. On the other hand, this might be a nice way to balance such lists.

Headhunter (10) : Score one victory point for each flagship you destroy.
Wording is constructed in such a way to be viable for 2v2 and 3v3 games in the future.

Speed Demon (8): During the end phase, score one victory point if one ship began and ended the turn at speed 4.
With the small board, going at such high speed is a risk. Then again some ships do this better than others.

Brute (5): Score one point the first time you deal a damage card through ramming. Score an additional point if the ship was destroyed as a result.
Award goes to the ship that destroys another on a first-move ram, but no additional point is awarded for an engine-techs induced damage card.

Flyswatter (5): Score if a ship destroyed at least 2 squadrons during one activation.

Silencer (3): Score one victory point for each squadron destroyed with the keywords Intel , Strategic , and Relay .

Collector (5): After obstacles are placed, players alternate putting 4 objective tokens on the playing field. When a ship is within distance 1 of an objective token and reveals a command dial, remove that objective token and score one Victory Point.
Something neutral for objective token placement.

Station Manager (10): The station is neutral and now has a hull of 8. At the end of each ship phase, it will attack the closest ships at long range from every player with 2 red dice. The player who destroys the station scores a victory point.

etc...

2. Alternating turn initiative

It's as simple as that. First player, before deploying fleets, determines if they want to be first or second player. First player is the first player for turns 1, 3, and 5. Second player is first player for turns 2, 4, and 6.

I may do some developing on this over the next week and present it on the next Patrol battles night. If anyone has some feedback I'd love to hear it.

Bump for new players to try. 200 points is very accessible. And with no additional rules its very easy to start learning the game one piece at a time.

I've had great success teaching Armada's core elements with the Taskforce format to completely casual players.

So, 225 or 200?

This weekend I'll be developing those objectives and trying them out this coming wed.

Task Force Format PDF (50mb)

Hey folks, I Just completed the basic PDF this morning. I modified the official FFG document for the Take the Station format. Thanks to Blail Blerg for creating it, Frightful Command for objective balancing, and the community for refining it with data and experience.

Edit: Upon printing the yellow did not show up well at all, so I will be reposting it as a printer friendly variant later today.

@TheBigLev , OH MY GODS THIS IS GORGEOUS! And you used the yellow Gladiator art I love the most. (Haha, though I understand changing it for better printing.) Its so easy to read and understand. And having the objective changes there is just amazing.

Love it. Yeah, the yellow text might need some orange or another pigment in case of printing.

@TheBigLev , some editing comments: You have one too many rocks in the visual example. Also, we should probably add to the visual diagram that "Initiative, 1st and 2nd player operate just as in normal rules."

I think this below is more clear:

4 hours ago, Blail Blerg said:

@TheBigLev , some editing comments: You have one too many rocks in the visual example. Also, we should probably add to the visual diagram that "Initiative, 1st and 2nd player operate just as in normal rules."

I think this below is more clear:

The main premise for this format is to keep the larger half of all things, and to introduce as few changes to the Armada rules as possible. For objectives, that means the larger half of the tokens placed or points gained is kept. If the change to the objective follows this simple rule, then it is written as “Halved, (keep larger half of tokens or points)”. If there is literally no change, then “No change”.

Also, the Objectives rebalancing section probably needs a header/title.

Alrighty I am doing an edited version with your changes, fixed the extra debris field, and will fix up the yellow text. The yellow Glad is here to stay though, never fear! Will post it up once complete.

Task Force Format v2.1 Final

Here is a final version of the PDF. Printed out much better and I cleaned up a bunch of small things. Feel free to leave commentary but I won't be fixing it up again until a critical mass of suggestions has been reached or if there is a glaring error. Thanks all!

Edit: Damnit somehow one of the range rulers doubled. Ok one FINAL fix for now and then I will await the next major revision.

14 minutes ago, TheBigLev said:

Task Force Format v2

Here is a final version of the PDF. Printed out much better and I cleaned up a bunch of small things. Feel free to leave commentary but I won't be fixing it up again until a critical mass of suggestions has been reached or if there is a glaring error. Thanks all!

Edit: Damnit somehow one of the range rulers doubled. Ok one FINAL fix for now and then I will await the next major revision.

I thought you had all the board for deployment?

also @Blail Blerg is 225 points better or 200?

18 minutes ago, TheBigLev said:

Task Force Format v2.1 Final

Here is a final version of the PDF. Printed out much better and I cleaned up a bunch of small things. Feel free to leave commentary but I won't be fixing it up again until a critical mass of suggestions has been reached or if there is a glaring error. Thanks all!

Edit: Damnit somehow one of the range rulers doubled. Ok one FINAL fix for now and then I will await the next major revision.

Nice format.

The wording for Most Wanted is off. I think you mean that you get 150% of the value of the objective ship, but that is not what is written.

7 minutes ago, TallGiraffe said:

I thought you had all the board for deployment?

also @Blail Blerg is 225 points better or 200?

I am just putting in what is in the first post, primarily. It indicates the no deployment zone of the side edges is Distance 3, and I (maybe incorrectly?) assumed the standard Distance 3 from the player edge also still applied.

2 minutes ago, stonestokes said:

Nice format.

The wording for Most Wanted is off. I think you mean that you get 150% of the value of the objective ship, but that is not what is written.

I suppose it could be clarified a little bit, but the wording is meant to refer to the Objective card text specifically. So halving the points value of the extra points from Most Wanted (so yes, 150% as opposed to 200%).

Look at Blail anyway, I am just the one putting the words into a PDF. *whistles innocently and slinks away*

Err. i think no "buffing" was done to the objectives. I think its just Most Wanted gives you half the points you normally earn.

No deployment zone is Distance 3 from the edge only.

My official stance is 200 points. =) (Its exactly half, and it also makes _even_ flotillas difficult to add in. You really gotta want one, there's no room for extras at all.)

-- again, no changes except keep larger half. That's the one driving principle.

@TheBigLev

I think it works for now, but here's my editing comments if you ever want to change it again:

Important - Wording issue: The "initiative" stuff you have doesn't really make sense.... What is initiative based on objective? I still recommend: "Initiative, 1st and 2nd player operate just as in normal rules."

Non-important - Readability issue - While I get you tried to use outlined text for the objectives, it looks really wonky.

---

Very cool. I'll print this out. And link your current on the first page. If you ever change it in the future, lemme know, and I'll update the link.

I'm having success still at 225. My next push was to introduce the new tactical objectives and alternating initiative to see what that did to the format before reining it in to 200. I don't think this format is going to have the same problems with activation flotilla padding as a full 400 would, but I could be wrong. I have yet to see anyone try it in our patrol games.

Alternate PDF Style - might be better for some users, changes the colours of the objective list

Thanks!

3 hours ago, Norsehound said:

I'm having success still at 225. My next push was to introduce the new tactical objectives and alternating initiative to see what that did to the format before reining it in to 200. I don't think this format is going to have the same problems with activation flotilla padding as a full 400 would, but I could be wrong. I have yet to see anyone try it in our patrol games.

I am also cautionarily worried about SAD - Strategic Adviser. It seems like a possible problem, but I think as I've found and everyone found: We think there are problem lists with the format, only find that really, so far nothing has really come out as entirely problematic. (Or, that the game has the same problems at 400 points.)

Also, Norse, do you want to start using the Taskforce name for this format? Its only confusing to keep calling it something else.

2 hours ago, Blail Blerg said:

I am also cautionarily worried about SAD - Strategic Adviser.

Big never mind. Tested SAD with a 1st player ISD. ... it was only worth 4 points. Really not as useful as expected at all. vs a 3 ship fighter list though. Fighters win by 17 MOV.

16 points were won from Precision Strike: 15/2 = 8 x 2 = 16. The extra point given by the objectiev in this case did not matter, as without it, fighters would still win by 1 point. But definitely anyone's game. This would have been very different if the ISD had attacked squadrons for one more round. (ISD did not die also.)

So... following the basic rule of cut everything in half and round up. The group I hang with is still just getting into the game and not everyone has a ton of ships to work with yet. Guess how we are playing the Correllian Conflict. Yes, we are all starting with 200 pt fleets. Campaign is going faster, still plenty fun and more accessible to the local group. The all out should still be pretty decent, something in the range of 800 vs 750. Maybe not as spectacular as the full version but still good and it is bringing in some new blood in a very engaging way. Some elements are a little quirky and will need some tweaks the next time around but still playable.

2 hours ago, Grand Admiral Buford said:

So... following the basic rule of cut everything in half and round up. The group I hang with is still just getting into the game and not everyone has a ton of ships to work with yet. Guess how we are playing the Correllian Conflict. Yes, we are all starting with 200 pt fleets. Campaign is going faster, still plenty fun and more accessible to the local group. The all out should still be pretty decent, something in the range of 800 vs 750. Maybe not as spectacular as the full version but still good and it is bringing in some new blood in a very engaging way. Some elements are a little quirky and will need some tweaks the next time around but still playable.

This format is perfect for smaller collections! Its more personal too. Hope to hear more about your CC

@Blail Blerg

Thanks for work on this variant and the PDF! I'm playing my first Taskforce game this weekend.

Your PDF is over 50MB in size. I pressed my wife, a graphic designer, into service and she did a quick weight-loss on the PDF to create a 1MB version for me. Better to store in my Dropbox folder with my other Armada rules and FAQs. The images are lower resolution than your original and your fancy Star Wars-themed fonts got lost. But it looks nearly identical, and might be better for folks with limited bandwidth or less storage space.

I don't have any where to post it for distro. I'd be glad to email it to you (or do a dropbox shared folder, etc.) if you're interested in putting it as an option with your original, high-quaility PDF.

6 minutes ago, ShoutingMan said:

@Blail Blerg

Thanks for work on this variant and the PDF! I'm playing my first Taskforce game this weekend.

Your PDF is over 50MB in size. I pressed my wife, a graphic designer, into service and she did a quick weight-loss on the PDF to create a 1MB version for me. Better to store in my Dropbox folder with my other Armada rules and FAQs. The images are lower resolution than your original and your fancy Star Wars-themed fonts got lost. But it looks nearly identical, and might be better for folks with limited bandwidth or less storage space.

I don't have any where to post it for distro. I'd be glad to email it to you (or do a dropbox shared folder, etc.) if you're interested in putting it as an option with your original, high-quaility PDF.

Actually @TheBigLev did it! We just posted on his google drive

Right, I see that on the PDF.