I'm sure I'm not the only one "watching the tapes" on Clon's mean raider list. I am struck more and more not on the list per se but on the flying and activation control that I see unfolding before my eyes.

What do you think about when you pick which ship to activate? Is it just me, or are there "chess-like" things going on with placement, protection, etc?

More importantly, can someone tell me how to think about this ?

Clon's formation was the most impressive part for me as well. He had a clear idea of what was going to activate at what time in order to minimize incoming firepower. His activation count allowed him to wait to get into range until after his opponent had already activated. Plain and simple, he didn't send a ship into range if his opponent could then shoot that ship in the same turn. He was able to do so with impunity because he had more ships than any of his opponents.

chess theory is actually very applicable to Armada

That was something that struck me when flying my variant of Clon's list, especially in the second game when I realized I was in deep trouble even with activation order. By going first, and by the way I flew, I would end my activation in range of three gunnery team A/Fs ready to open fire on fragile Raiders. They would do a number on whatever Raiders they fired upon, enough that I would be able to attack with one of them (or Demolisher) and then watch one of the wounded Raiders vanish before it got a chance to activate. Unless I could trade an Assault frigate for that Raider the game went entirely to the A/Fs. I predicted as much at the end of turn 1 when I realized this would happen.

So definitely activation order and where you move with that activation order is essential. It's also essential when trying to beat the RDR list.

I've played a lot more chess than armada. There's definitely something to "calculation" in chess being similar to Armada. In chess, you usually improve calculation by doing calculation puzzles (e.g. the tactics trainer at chess.com).

Here are some concepts that might be helpful:

1. You can only change the chess board one move at a time. Pawn structure is sometimes likened to "terrain" on a real battlefield. It usually gets fixed pretty definitively before move 15 and it takes a significant number of moves to change. In Armada, your fleet design defines the range of what you can accomplish. Ship speed and yaw are huge factors here, but so are initiative bid for first player, activation advantage, and deployment advantage.

2. Threat: Basically, what the player can do but has not yet done. In chess, a player might threaten to play Qxh7++ (That's the written form for Queen takes on h7 mate). You've got a move to prevent that. Recognizing threats is one of the most important low level skills that you need to develop. In Armada, this is as simple as recognizing what Demolisher with activation advantage and first player can accomplish, especially as Clon has outfitted it. You can definitely get a good sense of this with experience.

3. The double attack is the basis of nearly all chess tactics. Take the previous example of a mate threat. Now imagine that at the same time you threaten mate, you also threaten to win material. If your opponent can only prevent one of those (obviously the mate threat), then you win material. You're basically making two threats at the same time. Use fleet set up and maneuvering to increase your possible number of threats while limiting those of your opponent. Deployment advantage, activation advantage, and first player all help with these, as do some of the upgrades you choose.

4. Forced move: If you put your opponent's king in check and he only has one legal move that removes his king from check, that move is forced. If you threaten to win a decisive material advantage and the opponent has only one move that prevents it, this can be thought of as forced as well. You often see a similar thought process in Armada when you read some of the excellent after-game commentaries and the player mentions something to the effect of, "I set my speed to 3 because I realized I needed to close fast and get to his ships with lots of dice before his fighters shredded me." Or maybe your opponent deploys a Demolisher to the flank, which forces some change in your deployment.

5. Concentration of Force: This is probably the oldest idea in all of military strategy, but generally you want to concentrate as much as force as you can as efficiently and as effectively as possible. You want to bring absolutely as much firepower as possible on the smallest point of your opponent's line. That's where Clon's list shines. A combination of first player, activation advantage, and deployment advantage give it the maneuvering capability to ensure that it concentrates force effectively. If you look at every list out there that is popular, they all have some way of concentrating force. Squadrons are popular because you add the squadron attacks to your ship attacks in a particular zone of the board. Ackbar is popular because you relieve yourself of the need to maneuver for double-arcs and can concentrate firepower effectively out of one particular zone, so all you need is a way to limit tokens and you're punching through shields into hull. In fact, if you stop designing lists by saying "such and such is good with X unit" and start thinking, "How does this commander uniquely allow me to concentrate force effectively?", you'll start making more efficient fleets.

I think some of the problem is that the game is so new that everyone is still getting a handle on how to think about it. I think the entire community is still discovering what the threats are. Clon's list is a good example of this. We'll probably continue to see new ideas develop and be tried. As it does, the community will adjust to the new threat. As such, these are few thoughts I'm going to contribute to the beginning of that conversation.

chess theory is actually very applicable to Armada

I play more MtG than Chess, but really all strategy games can be boiled down to cross-applicable ideas with enough effort. Vergilus is spot on with everything he says, so there isn't much I feel I can add.

With that, I have noticed certain ideal times to do things. Moving your squads last via a command on the first turn, for example, allows you to make the most of the board position, but at the same time having less activations can mitigate that if you're forced to move them first, at which point first thing on turn 2 gives a similar positioning if you stall your own fighters out of the enemy range until then.

So do the types of ships in clon's build even matter if the list still ensures last first activation for demo??

So do the types of ships in clon's build even matter if the list still ensures last first activation for demo??

So do the types of ships in clon's build even matter if the list still ensures last first activation for demo??

sometimes

Instigator for sure... but what if you for instance had to exchange two of the raiders for Vic I 's instead??? You'd still get to plow with demo

So do the types of ships in clon's build even matter if the list still ensures last first activation for demo??

sometimes

Instigator for sure... but what if you for instance had to exchange two of the raiders for Vic I 's instead??? You'd still get to plow with demo

Yes demolisher is powerful but I still need my other ships to kill the majority of my opponents list most of the time. And the raiders speed is a real boon. It could potentially be done with gladiators but not vics

The only other chess term I think could be added is "forking," which is where you move a piece to a position where it can capture two (or more!) separate enemy pieces. During his turn he can only move one of them away to safety, basically allowing him to choose the lesser of the two evils presented to him.

An Armada version of this would be moving a serious threat into firing range of two enemy ships. Your enemy can activate and get one of them to relative safety next turn, but not both.

I'm sure I'm not the only one "watching the tapes" on Clon's mean raider list. I am struck more and more not on the list per se but on the flying and activation control that I see unfolding before my eyes.

What do you think about when you pick which ship to activate? Is it just me, or are there "chess-like" things going on with placement, protection, etc?

More importantly, can someone tell me how to think about this ?

I haven't been "watching the tapes" but I can offer something with regards to "how to think about this."

I tend to try first to eliminate choices that are "wrong." I don't look so much for how to win as "how not to lose." This can't be the end all be all of it but the paths to victory are uncertain and constantly changing. The paths to defeat are typically quite clear. Learn what those are (there's a reason why the "keys to the game" before every football game are always the same.)

Failing to think about where things are going to be. What to do is about where things are going.

Failing to consider the order things will happen. It seems like a lot but there really aren't that many choices to make or that your opponent can make. The trick is making the choices in the proper order. This is a complimentary idea to my first.

Taking away my own options. Making a choice that leaves me with only one choice or option on the next turn.

Not taking away my opponent's choices.

Not having a plan.

Not having a contingency plan.

Not following the plans.

Not knowing when it is time to abandon the plans.

Not having a notion of my opponent's plans.

The only other chess term I think could be added is "forking," which is where you move a piece to a position where it can capture two (or more!) separate enemy pieces. During his turn he can only move one of them away to safety, basically allowing him to choose the lesser of the two evils presented to him.

An Armada version of this would be moving a serious threat into firing range of two enemy ships. Your enemy can activate and get one of them to relative safety next turn, but not both.

I hate it when my opponent places his forking pieces on my side of the board.

<DELETED> Stupid comment, added nothing to conversation.

Chess analogies don't really apply to the armada meta game though. I am sure we could come up with ways to change the rules/setup of chess to illustrate, that will take longer than I have at the moment though, so I'll just go straight to the problem.

The introduction of INTEL has already made having minimal fighter cover fairly pointless, in most cases. So exempting the raider title, you either play the fighter game or you ignore it.

We are dealing with two concepts that have been a problem in Armada since wave 1 released: Underbidding+Demolisher and ship only lists, as well as a combination of both. Are both valid strategies? Sure. Are they in the spirit of the game as intended? That's up to FFG.

My expectations?

A release of fighters/upgrades/rules that boost power against targets when there is no enemy fighters present within a certain range, to the point that an unescorted ISD/mc80 will die in one round to a capped fighter squad. This will punish not having any fighters at all, and reward clearing opposing fighter cover.

or

Introduction of some sort of "launching" mechanic, allowing players with fighters to go through a process to remove fighters from their list prior to determining initiative. This will allow a player to shed antifighter squadrons to increase their bid. This seems like a decent way slant the playing field since the points would be mostly wasted anyways.

That being said. It is also possible these entire problems exist because the game isn't "complete" yet. However in the tournaments I have played in, playing the meta and good matchups have been just as important as skill.

Last time I played a 5 ship list it contained, Salvation, Yavaris, Foresight, Jainas Light and a non title corvette. The problem I found with this list is that every single unit wanted to activate at specific moments. Salvation always last, Foresight last and first. Yavaris early and the corvette early when in danger. I lost both corvettes early in order to save Foresight from getting battered.

From this I learnt that I need to understand the importance of each ship, and maximise the activation position of the important ships, and plan ahead following turns. Sometimes the best a ship can do, is waste an activation and stay at range.

This really reminds of me watching Zemalf's XCOM playthrough where he has a similar idea of trying to be so "concentrated-ly aggresive" he takes otherwise fragile things and defends them by avoiding threats until he can neutralize them.

It does remind me of doing chess puzzles back in school also: in the crudest terms, "what can I kill and what can kill me if I move piece X to position A?"

Of course, because list construction, deployment, and the random factor introduce so many more variables, the activation strategy does not seem quite as apparent at first glance, but I'm beginning to see how it's equally as important as knowing how to fly!

I'm really appreciating the Vassal logs for this fact: what I want to know is, is it possible to outplay the list rather than outbuild the list? I've been trying to use the lists/deployments from the vassal world cup to see what, if any, alternative moves could be made, but I think I'm frankly kind of out my league here. Has anyone else been looking at this? There are a few unexpected things, like attempting to ram demolisher to screw with things, but that generally doesn't bode well the next turn

More units you have to move in any game gives the player with more a big advantage its just that simple. and with 6 or 5 to 2 or 3 its all one sided