Second player now starts with a 6 point win if no points scored

second player wins if Mutual Destruction

second player wind if draw

do you now want to be second player more or this does not phase you?

Our local group had this discussion when the core game first came out, as the "basic" rules had second player winning in the event of a draw. Having played X-Wing prior to that, we were unaware of just how different the Armada scoring structure was, and how it would impact tournament results.

Experience since then has taught us that over a three round tournament, middling scores generally don't get players into the top cut (at least not in a relatively small meta). As such, "fly away for the draw" wasn't really a viable tactic.

I think this new ruling was made to encourage players to shy away from Demolisher/First Player default thinking. Time will tell if it's successful, but for myself, I don't think it will influence my choice of build (which inherently determines my preference of First or Second Player).

Doesn't phase me at all. You don't make the top table with mediocre scores. I'm playing to win. I'm going to be takes chances. I'm going to be daring.

I think that 18 tournament points from going second, and just running from your opponent all game 3 times will not be enough to consistently win tournaments. You'll generally do decently.

It's still a game about risk/reward, and nothing guarantees that second player will be able to fight to a draw, or avoid their opponent all game.

I doubt that many people will capitalize on building for 2nd player just to nab the 6/5 split. It's pretty unambitious.

Doesn't phase me at all. You don't make the top table with mediocre scores. I'm playing to win. I'm going to be takes chances. I'm going to be daring.

Good man THIS is the spirit

I would rather a 10 point win, half the field scores a 6+ in their first game.

Given that 8 is the new 7, tournaments are going to be won or lost in the 25+ range.

I like the changes. They give second player a fractionally stronger position than they had before without having to rewrite the main rules. I still prefer first player but feel a little less incentivised to have a large initiative bid.

Designing a list and playing consistently for draws is dangerous. What if someone has a better bid and makes you first player and you are stuck with a defensive fleet designed to avoid contact. Even as second player the enemy must simply score a point by killing an A-wing or grabbing an objective token and all of a sudden you find yourself having to reverse direction towards the enemy and take the fight to him while it may already be turn 4.

Doesn't phase me at all. You don't make the top table with mediocre scores. I'm playing to win. I'm going to be takes chances. I'm going to be daring.

Good man THIS is the spirit

You have to take a risk, 8 points each round is what you need to make tip table. If you can't do that or if you do draw one and 10-1 the next you could do it.

I think people are forgetting one thing with this change in tournament points. They are thinking of previous tournaments and equating those points to these. Well that is likely not why the change occurred. The change likely occurred due to the advent of Flotillas being cheap! As it stands if a player brings 5 flotillas and 1-2 big ships they could lose a flotilla and never care. With the new system that changes slightly.

I think that 18 tournament points from going second, and just running from your opponent all game 3 times will not be enough to consistently win tournaments. You'll generally do decently.

It's still a game about risk/reward, and nothing guarantees that second player will be able to fight to a draw, or avoid their opponent all game.

I doubt that many people will capitalize on building for 2nd player just to nab the 6/5 split. It's pretty unambitious.

Agreed but it might come down to one game where you see a superior fleet and you realize that 6 points is better than 1. Before the new scoring system the top 4 in tournaments were many times within a point or two and a tactical decision to take 6 points could win you a tournament. Now I think the points will be even closer.

I think that 18 tournament points from going second, and just running from your opponent all game 3 times will not be enough to consistently win tournaments. You'll generally do decently.

It's still a game about risk/reward, and nothing guarantees that second player will be able to fight to a draw, or avoid their opponent all game.

I doubt that many people will capitalize on building for 2nd player just to nab the 6/5 split. It's pretty unambitious.

Agreed but it might come down to one game where you see a superior fleet and you realize that 6 points is better than 1. Before the new scoring system the top 4 in tournaments were many times within a point or two and a tactical decision to take 6 points could win you a tournament. Now I think the points will be even closer.

I learnt this lesson. Never take a fleet to a tournament where you fear any particular match up. Its not fun. I also advise against superior positions for the same reason. What are you going to do when someone sets up a defensive fleet before you?

I think it's a good move as it seems to promote aggressive play. One of the main gripes with the game when we started playing was cautious players making games turn into 3 turns of positioning, 1 turn of shooting, and then 2 turns of lying away. Game is way more fun when you get in your opponent's face and throw black dice at his eyes. Figuratively of course.

IMO I think the 1st player bid system needs a bit of a change, but that's a subject for another time.

I think that 18 tournament points from going second, and just running from your opponent all game 3 times will not be enough to consistently win tournaments. You'll generally do decently.

It's still a game about risk/reward, and nothing guarantees that second player will be able to fight to a draw, or avoid their opponent all game.

I doubt that many people will capitalize on building for 2nd player just to nab the 6/5 split. It's pretty unambitious.

Agreed but it might come down to one game where you see a superior fleet and you realize that 6 points is better than 1. Before the new scoring system the top 4 in tournaments were many times within a point or two and a tactical decision to take 6 points could win you a tournament. Now I think the points will be even closer.

I learnt this lesson. Never take a fleet to a tournament where you fear any particular match up. Its not fun. I also advise against superior positions for the same reason. What are you going to do when someone sets up a defensive fleet before you?

I dont think there are any fleets that you can build that you wont find a rock to your scissors. Its not fear of them its understanding that sometimes the odds are too stacked against you. In terms of fighting against defensive fleets I dont have a problem against them. If they are defensive they wont stand up to my competitive build usually because it is designed to hit very hard and if they are defensive they typically dont have enough firepower to kill me before I kill them. It is the offensive fleets that prey on my fleets weaknesses that I worry about. My current competitive build (like everyone's) has a very specific weakness and I know it when I see it. In tournaments I see it rarely if at all so that usually means there is only 1 game that I might use this tactic. In fact in the last 6 tournaments (including 2 regionals) I saw it once.

All that being said I obviously still lose to better skilled opponents even when I see a potentially weaker fleet. That is the beauty of this game, it is mostly about skill.

Another consideration is you are going to need to have fast ships to run successfully, and no objectives that reward points to players for camping objectives. All VSDs aren't going to run very successfully, and neither will a double pickle, even with engine techs. I think we may see more varied builds due to this, and I think bidding might be a little less aggressive.

Another consideration is you are going to need to have fast ships to run successfully, and no objectives that reward points to players for camping objectives. All VSDs aren't going to run very successfully, and neither will a double pickle, even with engine techs. I think we may see more varied builds due to this, and I think bidding might be a little less aggressive.

Its funny that you say that because that is exactly how my fleet is designed and I rarely pick objectives that can give my opponents points.

Well sounds like a good deal for your sweet glad list, then! I do like how the point cap makes non-point objectives worth building for again.

Well sounds like a good deal for your sweet glad list, then! I do like how the point cap makes non-point objectives worth building for again.

That is an interesting point that I didnt consider.

How many times have you actually played out to an actual draw where the winner was decided by the rules?

I mean, in all the games I've played, I've had days where the MoV was close ( 2-6 points), but never equal.

And only once have I had a true Mutual Destruction of Ships in the same round... (Shoot then fly off board)...

So actual "Draws" have been very very very rare...

Always been a Winner and a Loser.

So I'm not fussed by any changes at all... Winners are rewarded. Play to have a good time, Aim to Win.

Counter to this notion that Second Player has been buffed is the MoV points cap at 400. In the Store Championship I won, I was usually 2nd player and was able to rack up a TON of MoV by getting all those objective points (e.g. Superior Position, Contested Outpost). That MoV was well above the 400 points cap.

Of course, that MoV only counts for so much against Tournament Points that it's somewhat negligible, as is the benefits gained in effectively getting a draw.

So, this really isn't 'a thing'.

Counterpoint: first player will have the avatar in killing anything, so losing even a single squadron means you lose the game. Hope you brought Fire Lanes or Contested Outpost.

How many times have you actually played out to an actual draw where the winner was decided by the rules?

I mean, in all the games I've played, I've had days where the MoV was close ( 2-6 points), but never equal.

And only once have I had a true Mutual Destruction of Ships in the same round... (Shoot then fly off board)...

So actual "Draws" have been very very very rare...

Always been a Winner and a Loser.

So I'm not fussed by any changes at all... Winners are rewarded. Play to have a good time, Aim to Win.

Happened to me and Parker at regionals. We both scored I think 254 or some such. It was wacky.

In my own mind I won't change my bid for trying to be first...as you always have the option then of going second by choice.

Doesn't change for me.. if it's like a regional where my main goal is top 8 for dice, then it may be a bit of a lure.. but ultimately you need a few over-8 wins to expect a top 4 or top spot. For that you need to be aggressive, and generally get a little luck in matchups/dice.

I've never played a game with no points scored, mutual destruction, or a true draw. So no, it won't affect me at all

I have seen a tournament game where only one Tie bomber died and then both fleets avoided each other with excessive circling.

In the old scoring system a 5-5 and an almost useless technical win discouraged this type of play more.

Under the new scoring system it can be a valid tactic to get a 6-5 win (though it is unlikely to get you a major event win but can work after the cut).