Ok, so, here is an issue I'm starting to come up against in competitive play.

The last 2 tournies I was at, I have won all of my games. My points were as follows:

8-2

8-2

6-4

-----------

7-3

8-2

(no 3rd game played)

What I have noticed, is that, by round 4, my opponent realizes how screwed he is, and in turns 5-6, he'll run away with whatever is left of his fleet to keep the MOV down to a minimum.

An opponent who wants to disengage, usually stands a pretty good chance at doing so, as the concept of chasing someone in Armada does not really pan out for you.

Now in all of those games, I outplayed my opponent, destroyed way more of his stuff, and had him on the run. Yet I can still only manage scores of 7 or 8. The diminishing returns of the MOV table tells me I have to destroy way more of his stuff in order to earn those precious 8/2's or 9/1's (and 10's are just crazy hard to get against an opponent who is even close to your skill level..which, I'm ok with, it is as it should be.)

Looking at the table we see:

29 pt mov results in 5 VP's.

the next 40 pts of mov result in 6 VPs

the next 60 pts of mov result in 7 VPs

the next 90 pts of mov result in 8 VPs

the next 110 pts of mov result in 9 VPs

So I guess my question is two fold:

1. How do you prevent your opponent from just disengaging and denying you VP's, despite you giving him a black eye.

2. If there is no way to prevent that, does the MOV tourney VP's table need a revision?

I'm of the opinion that if I pounded the snot out of my opponent and he is now running away, my victory should be greater. Granted "running away" is a subjective concept, but I'm sure there's a way to define it. (Ex: If an opponent's ship is at half-hull or less and at range med-close of a table edge, you get 1/2 points for it...something like that?)

In many of my fleet builds I use a ship as a 'Trailer' to my main formation. Basically I keep a ship back that I don't plan on engaging until later in the game. I use this ship to finish off damaged ships that are trying to escape and to cut off escape routes as needed.

The Neb-B excels as this. It is fast enough, fairly maneuverable, and has long-range guns.

More details here

It really takes patience and the ability to see where the best place to escape the rest of your fleet will be. Very effective when it works though.

No the MoV table doesn't need a revision.

You can't prevent your opponent from disengaging, unless you outmaneuver them and prevent it.

My issue is people losing 1-2 ships and throwing the towel in, so instead of their opponent getting a 6-4, 7-3 or even an 8-2, they end up with a 10-0, 400 points mov, you should never ever throw the towel in, play till the end and keep stuff alive, it is in your own interest to score some points, and prevent people getting crazy wins they didn't earn.

If you manage to table someone, while either scoring enough vps from objectives or letting your opponent only kill 49 points worth of your stuff, hats off to you, you earned your 10-0 400+ points MoV.

Also I'd love to see a change to the rules for draws.

If at the end of the game zero points have been scored by either player, they both get a loss and 0 TP's.

If you end up within 20 points or less of each other, that should earn you a 5-5, but this do nothing for 6 rounds and get 5 points is ridiculous, the above change would prevent players doing this.

Umm, trying to preserve MoV when you're taking a licking is a part of the tourney strategy. It's also pretty thematic, as in any "real world" Star Wars engagement, you'd think a losing force would try to maximize their survival and minimize their losses when victory slips out of reach.


That being said, you should always plan on an opponent trying to minimize MoV losses when the tide turns, and it's not a bad idea to have "prevent escape" plans as part of your engagement vector and strategy.


But yes, a "flaw" of the tourney system is that good players are pretty mindful of not getting 10-0'ed or 9-1'ed, whereas a newer or less careful player might get themselves tabled. Doing so practically hands an insurmountable 10-0 lead to their opponent, especially in a short 3 Round tourney. So then tourney results become less about finding the best player, and more about finding the player who had the least competent opponents, for better or worse.

I understand what you mean, and it can be frustrating, but it definitely is an aspect of the game. Were you in your opponent's shoes, I assume you might want to salvage what you can and try to get as many points as possible.

I think it might be important to have a plan to prevent this rather than changing how the game calculates the score. As you mentioned, it would be difficult to judge what is running away and what isn't, but for certain ships "running" is the only defense, so it seems to me that it would be unfair to punish them.

Having rogues or speedy ships that can catch up and smack a ship running away are two ways to deal with runners.

I have a solution, bring overwhelming firepower and destroy them within 2 turns of Engagment. Basically don't Allow an opportunity to Escape!

It's one of the reasons my Clonisher List does so well since it can Table you in 2 turns.

Alternatively useing bombers and long range weapons (such as trc) to chase them down works pretty well

I have a solution, bring overwhelming firepower and destroy them within 2 turns of Engagment. Basically don't Allow an opportunity to Escape!

It's one of the reasons my Clonisher List does so well since it can Table you in 2 turns.

Alternatively useing bombers and long range weapons (such as trc) to chase them down works pretty well

Clon, I agree. The problem is this:

1. If you bring overwhelming firepower to bear down, and pursue a strategy of "Violence of Action", then you will no doubt take out a couple ships, and probably win. This is how I have played the last 2 tournies, and it typically gets me a 7/3 or 8/2 victory. But, you leave yourself open to an enemy ship (or 2) slipping away, and that is where your score stays. This is typically what I have seen.

2. Conversely, you could leave a rear-zone mop-up ship, as Schmitty suggested. I'm starting to come around to this idea and tinker with it. But, if you do, that's one less ship bringing the heat down in your initial approach. Is it worth the trade off? I'm not sure.

I understand what you mean, and it can be frustrating, but it definitely is an aspect of the game. Were you in your opponent's shoes, I assume you might want to salvage what you can and try to get as many points as possible.

I think it might be important to have a plan to prevent this rather than changing how the game calculates the score. As you mentioned, it would be difficult to judge what is running away and what isn't, but for certain ships "running" is the only defense, so it seems to me that it would be unfair to punish them.

Having rogues or speedy ships that can catch up and smack a ship running away are two ways to deal with runners.

I'm not convinced you really can have a plan to address this, when a typical list will have 3-4 ships, maybe 5, and the more ships you have, the more your firepower is spread out, and thus the more of said ships you need to have in order to focus fire down an opponent in the first place. But essentially, this is what I'm asking for. What is the plan for this?

I have a solution, bring overwhelming firepower and destroy them within 2 turns of Engagment. Basically don't Allow an opportunity to Escape!

It's one of the reasons my Clonisher List does so well since it can Table you in 2 turns.

Alternatively useing bombers and long range weapons (such as trc) to chase them down works pretty well

Clon, I agree. The problem is this:

1. If you bring overwhelming firepower to bear down, and pursue a strategy of "Violence of Action", then you will no doubt take out a couple ships, and probably win. This is how I have played the last 2 tournies, and it typically gets me a 7/3 or 8/2 victory. But, you leave yourself open to an enemy ship (or 2) slipping away, and that is where your score stays. This is typically what I have seen.

2. Conversely, you could leave a rear-zone mop-up ship, as Schmitty suggested. I'm starting to come around to this idea and tinker with it. But, if you do, that's one less ship bringing the heat down in your initial approach. Is it worth the trade off? I'm not sure.

Gunnery team ISD's, vettes and raiders, glads or shrimps, all capable of havring the firepower needed to kill everything Very quickly

Umm, trying to preserve MoV when you're taking a licking is a part of the tourney strategy. It's also pretty thematic, as in any "real world" Star Wars engagement, you'd think a losing force would try to maximize their survival and minimize their losses when victory slips out of reach.

That being said, you should always plan on an opponent trying to minimize MoV losses when the tide turns, and it's not a bad idea to have "prevent escape" plans as part of your engagement vector and strategy.

But yes, a "flaw" of the tourney system is that good players are pretty mindful of not getting 10-0'ed or 9-1'ed, whereas a newer or less careful player might get themselves tabled. Doing so practically hands an insurmountable 10-0 lead to their opponent, especially in a short 3 Round tourney. So then tourney results become less about finding the best player, and more about finding the player who had the least competent opponents, for better or worse.

I agree, it's part of tourney strategy. But should it be worth as much as it is? If you're job is to engage, and destroy or route the enemy fleet, if they are running away, aren't you successful?? (and yes, I understand there is a lot of discussion to be had for what does a 10/0 score mean vs. a 7/3 in terms of pairing them up to actual naval victory conditions)

Your second paragraph, about the flaws of the tourney system is mostly what I'm concerned about. I could play an opponent and basically be kicking his butt and only end up with a 6-4 because he disengages. Meanwhile someone else plays "as well" as me, but gets a 10-0 because his opponent was too stupid to realize he had no dog in the fight and got tabled.

I have a solution, bring overwhelming firepower and destroy them within 2 turns of Engagment. Basically don't Allow an opportunity to Escape!

It's one of the reasons my Clonisher List does so well since it can Table you in 2 turns.

Alternatively useing bombers and long range weapons (such as trc) to chase them down works pretty well

Clon, I agree. The problem is this:

1. If you bring overwhelming firepower to bear down, and pursue a strategy of "Violence of Action", then you will no doubt take out a couple ships, and probably win. This is how I have played the last 2 tournies, and it typically gets me a 7/3 or 8/2 victory. But, you leave yourself open to an enemy ship (or 2) slipping away, and that is where your score stays. This is typically what I have seen.

2. Conversely, you could leave a rear-zone mop-up ship, as Schmitty suggested. I'm starting to come around to this idea and tinker with it. But, if you do, that's one less ship bringing the heat down in your initial approach. Is it worth the trade off? I'm not sure.

you don't understand, bring overwhelming firepower down on EVERYTHING! Kill it All it one pass

Gunnery team ISD's, vettes and raiders, glads or shrimps, all capable of havring the firepower needed to kill everything Very quickly

Clon, as you're in WA and I'm in NY, I won't be seeing you at any Regionals. But I hope you make it to Nationals, and that your signature list faces off against my signature list, because I really want to see how you achieve this against me :-)

I understand what you mean, and it can be frustrating, but it definitely is an aspect of the game. Were you in your opponent's shoes, I assume you might want to salvage what you can and try to get as many points as possible.

I think it might be important to have a plan to prevent this rather than changing how the game calculates the score. As you mentioned, it would be difficult to judge what is running away and what isn't, but for certain ships "running" is the only defense, so it seems to me that it would be unfair to punish them.

Having rogues or speedy ships that can catch up and smack a ship running away are two ways to deal with runners.

I'm not convinced you really can have a plan to address this, when a typical list will have 3-4 ships, maybe 5, and the more ships you have, the more your firepower is spread out, and thus the more of said ships you need to have in order to focus fire down an opponent in the first place. But essentially, this is what I'm asking for. What is the plan for this?

Well, it really depends on what you're facing, and I'm not saying you will always be able to catch your opponent or deal with all running situations, but at least have an idea as to how to try. I guess this would be easier to talk about if you tell us what you typically roll with.

Deployment plays a huge factor in determining how easily an opponent can run from you. One suggestion is having stuff lagging behind some, so if something tries to get past you, there is something to catch it in an arc. I know this is a little vague, but again it is easier to discuss how one might deal with it if we knew what ships/opponent ships you are dealing with.

A few general options of things that can help with this:

Blocking/ramming

Squadrons, especially fast rogues like YT-2400's

First player

Demolisher

Corvette mop-up support

Ongoing-damage crits

Ultimately, though, it's generally a lot easier to run away than it is to stop someone from running away. If you're relatively evenly matched against your opponent, sometimes he's just going to get away and there's not going to be much you can do about it.

I don't think it's necessarily bad design if not every game ends in a blowout. I think the ability to salvage points by running away--or prevent your opponent from doing so--is an important part of delineating player skill on a more granular scale than win vs loss.

I have a solution, bring overwhelming firepower and destroy them within 2 turns of Engagment. Basically don't Allow an opportunity to Escape!

It's one of the reasons my Clonisher List does so well since it can Table you in 2 turns.

Alternatively useing bombers and long range weapons (such as trc) to chase them down works pretty well

Clon, I agree. The problem is this:

1. If you bring overwhelming firepower to bear down, and pursue a strategy of "Violence of Action", then you will no doubt take out a couple ships, and probably win. This is how I have played the last 2 tournies, and it typically gets me a 7/3 or 8/2 victory. But, you leave yourself open to an enemy ship (or 2) slipping away, and that is where your score stays. This is typically what I have seen.

2. Conversely, you could leave a rear-zone mop-up ship, as Schmitty suggested. I'm starting to come around to this idea and tinker with it. But, if you do, that's one less ship bringing the heat down in your initial approach. Is it worth the trade off? I'm not sure.

you don't understand, bring overwhelming firepower down on EVERYTHING! Kill it All it one pass

Gunnery team ISD's, vettes and raiders, glads or shrimps, all capable of havring the firepower needed to kill everything Very quickly

Clon, as you're in WA and I'm in NY, I won't be seeing you at any Regionals. But I hope you make it to Nationals, and that your signature list faces off against my signature list, because I really want to see how you achieve this against me :-)

What is your signature list?

A few general options of things that can help with this:

Blocking/ramming

Squadrons, especially fast rogues like YT-2400's

First player

Demolisher

Corvette mop-up support

Ongoing-damage crits

Ultimately, though, it's generally a lot easier to run away than it is to stop someone from running away. If you're relatively evenly matched against your opponent, sometimes he's just going to get away and there's not going to be much you can do about it.

I don't think it's necessarily bad design if not every game ends in a blowout. I think the ability to salvage points by running away--or prevent your opponent from doing so--is an important part of delineating player skill on a more granular scale than win vs loss.

In general I like this. I might have to restructure my list to less of a "get behind you" list and get more balance. If that's the case, I'm actually all for it, as I believe that the design goal of all games like this are to emphasize and incentiv-ize bringing "all-comer" lists to the tourney table. I might have too much speed, presently and rather need something that hangs out mid or backfield. I think I'm going to take out my AFMK2 and put in a back-hanging Neb B and see how that does.

I generally bid for first player, so that's not an issue.

I'm currently in a Rebel state of mind, so Demolisher is not an option for me at the moment.

Ongoing Damage Crits: really only possible to plan for this with a Dodonna build.

I have a solution, bring overwhelming firepower and destroy them within 2 turns of Engagment. Basically don't Allow an opportunity to Escape!

It's one of the reasons my Clonisher List does so well since it can Table you in 2 turns.

Alternatively useing bombers and long range weapons (such as trc) to chase them down works pretty well

Clon, I agree. The problem is this:

1. If you bring overwhelming firepower to bear down, and pursue a strategy of "Violence of Action", then you will no doubt take out a couple ships, and probably win. This is how I have played the last 2 tournies, and it typically gets me a 7/3 or 8/2 victory. But, you leave yourself open to an enemy ship (or 2) slipping away, and that is where your score stays. This is typically what I have seen.

2. Conversely, you could leave a rear-zone mop-up ship, as Schmitty suggested. I'm starting to come around to this idea and tinker with it. But, if you do, that's one less ship bringing the heat down in your initial approach. Is it worth the trade off? I'm not sure.

you don't understand, bring overwhelming firepower down on EVERYTHING! Kill it All it one pass

Gunnery team ISD's, vettes and raiders, glads or shrimps, all capable of havring the firepower needed to kill everything Very quickly

Clon, as you're in WA and I'm in NY, I won't be seeing you at any Regionals. But I hope you make it to Nationals, and that your signature list faces off against my signature list, because I really want to see how you achieve this against me :-)

You wont. . . I most likely will. . . Tacoma regionals most likely. . . bleh

A few general options of things that can help with this:

Blocking/ramming

Squadrons, especially fast rogues like YT-2400's

First player

Demolisher

Corvette mop-up support

Ongoing-damage crits

Ultimately, though, it's generally a lot easier to run away than it is to stop someone from running away. If you're relatively evenly matched against your opponent, sometimes he's just going to get away and there's not going to be much you can do about it.

I don't think it's necessarily bad design if not every game ends in a blowout. I think the ability to salvage points by running away--or prevent your opponent from doing so--is an important part of delineating player skill on a more granular scale than win vs loss.

I can attest to the effectiveness of TRC90 mop up support.

I might argue that the ability to disengage effectively / prevent your opponent from doing so is one of the ways to separate good players from great players, and the impact on MoV is a feature, not a bug.

I might argue that the ability to disengage effectively / prevent your opponent from doing so is one of the ways to separate good players from great players, and the impact on MoV is a feature, not a bug.

Correct. Being able to salvage your score in the second and third round is also a sign of a competent player. I have gone 5-5 in a round and still pulled top table in the end. It is possible.

I stand by what everyone has already said. It's a feature of the game and it separates good players from bad. In real history, knowing when you've lost and being able to prevent a total loss is (possibly equally so to winning) a measure of how good a commander you are. Think about General Washington, who, one might say, was an unremarkable tactician, but ultimately a cunning strategist for keeping his army alive and perpetually out of reach of total destruction.

On the flipside, you should have cards up your sleeve to prevent this, just like real armies and navies do. Faster units or units with a lot of range and punch will help you. CR90As with TRCs, and fighters. Ultimately, some ships will not be caught, so you have to judge when you need to pull your fire and stop shooting them because they won't be killed this game.

If I can lose 4-6 instead of 2-8 and then pull off some 9-1's later, I might have a chance to take home some loot. No shame in that.

If I can lose 4-5 instead of 2-8 and then pull off some 9-1's later, I might have a chance to take home some loot. No shame in that.

That is how I have seen it done.

shmitty had a come from behind victory are GenCon last year. He got 2nd place but it can be done.

Guys to be sure, I want to make it know that the basic paradigm of running and living to fight another day is fine. What I'm not sold on is how easy it is to save your bacon and deny VP's to your opponent. As it stands, if your opponent realizes early on he has botched deployment or has been "out-listed" it's very easy for him to deploy and move in such a way that he completely disallows any engagement, and thus you go 6 rounds ending up with a 5-5 game. I realize and agree that should be a tactic. I also agree that disengaging to mitigate a further degradation of your MOV should be a tactic. I just don't know that it should be as effective as it currently is. My gut response is that this requires some change to the MOV table. Maybe there are other ways. Maybe I just need to deal with it, who knows.

Either way, it's fun to discuss :-D

Guys to be sure, I want to make it know that the basic paradigm of running and living to fight another day is fine. What I'm not sold on is how easy it is to save your bacon and deny VP's to your opponent. As it stands, if your opponent realizes early on he has botched deployment or has been "out-listed" it's very easy for him to deploy and move in such a way that he completely disallows any engagement, and thus you go 6 rounds ending up with a 5-5 game. I realize and agree that should be a tactic. I also agree that disengaging to mitigate a further degradation of your MOV should be a tactic. I just don't know that it should be as effective as it currently is. My gut response is that this requires some change to the MOV table. Maybe there are other ways. Maybe I just need to deal with it, who knows.

Either way, it's fun to discuss :-D

If you change the MoV table then the loss of a single large ship will catapult people several sections up or down. Far more than they do now.

I stated in an earlier thread my current fleet has really nothing against someone who decides from the getgo they don't want to engage me. But if you are swarming with MC30s and CR90s... good luck trying to stay disengaged from that. Just another question Mothma swarms are a perfect answer to.