Warning: typing from cellphone.

In the squadrons thread, people talked of how flotillas changed the game by increasing the number of activations by using very cheap ships.

One solution someone suggested is to allow flotillas towards the squad count.

Someone else suggested that if you have less activations than your opponent, that you can delay your own activations.

My suggestion is that if you activate a flotilla, it doesn't count as an activation unless it's you last ship.

Say you activate a flotilla, you must either activate a ship like a mc30 to let your opponent play next turn. Or you can activate another flotilla. If you do, you still have to activate another non flotilla ship afterwards.

Thoughts?

I think the simplest fix is to take the rule FFG already uses in IA to address this exact problem:

If the opponent has more remaining activations than you, you can pass.

That lessens activation pressure (the n+1 activation has less value to a list) and greatly increases the value of large ships (because you can always delay to go last, so they don't get as horribly outmaneuvered). I think this would need to be playtested, but is likely to be a positive change for meta flexibility and the game.

I think the simplest fix is to take the rule FFG already uses in IA to address this exact problem:

If the opponent has more remaining activations than you, you can pass.

That lessens activation pressure (the n+1 activation has less value to a list) and greatly increases the value of large ships (because you can always delay to go last, so they don't get as horribly outmaneuvered). I think this would need to be playtested, but is likely to be a positive change for meta flexibility and the game.

I don't think that's a good idea. Demolisher is strong enough as it is. First player would just keep passing until they had last activation. Having lots of activations is a fleet build choice, you give up fancy expensive stuff, it's a trade off. Personally I don't see any problems with the activation game as it stands.

I think the only way to keep it balanced would be what Reinholt suggested. Give the option to pass activations.

But FFG has said they want activations to be an important mechanic in the game.

I'm all for it. I don't really care for playing against 6+ ship lists, especially ones that have 4 flotillas as activation padding. But it is important to the game and I worry about the consequences of doing what IA does.

Eh, I think activations are an interesting part of the game.

One problem I see up front with your rolling-activation proposal is that it would let/force someone with an all-flotilla build to activate their entire fleet at once. The flotilla activations are balanced around not being able to push very many squadrons at once to limit the size of their alpha strike--i.e., the supercarrier ISD1's can push up to six squadrons all at once for a sizeable alpha strike, but a flotilla can push no more than 4, best case. If you used your proposal, you could be looking at 14 TIE fighters getting thrown before the other guy has had a chance to do anything at all.

People are getting pretty stuck on flotilla activations, but they're pretty well implemented in my experience. I do think the Gozanti might be a point or two over costed with respect to the GR-75, but otherwise I have no problem with flotilla fillers. They put more ships on the table making the game look cooler, serve interesting roles, increase the complexity of the activation order game which I think is a huge piece of this game, provide great filler squadron activations, and counterbalance ECM in the accuracy mini-meta.

I think the simplest fix is to take the rule FFG already uses in IA to address this exact problem:

If the opponent has more remaining activations than you, you can pass.

That lessens activation pressure (the n+1 activation has less value to a list) and greatly increases the value of large ships (because you can always delay to go last, so they don't get as horribly outmaneuvered). I think this would need to be playtested, but is likely to be a positive change for meta flexibility and the game.

would a pass mechanic undercut the benefits of undercutting points.

I love big ships and I can not lie. The low activation count is a detriment. Usually you need to play slower (speed) as to not over extend too hard.

delaying would be like essentially being speed 0 without the lack of defensive tokens and jumping potentially 3 speeds at in one go.

I feel big ships, should lose the speed 0 no defense token thing. let them sit and bully a wide area of the map. it would make ozzel much better too.

Eh, I think activations are an interesting part of the game.

One problem I see up front with your rolling-activation proposal is that it would let/force someone with an all-flotilla build to activate their entire fleet at once. The flotilla activations are balanced around not being able to push very many squadrons at once to limit the size of their alpha strike--i.e., the supercarrier ISD1's can push up to six squadrons all at once for a sizeable alpha strike, but a flotilla can push no more than 4, best case. If you used your proposal, you could be looking at 14 TIE fighters getting thrown before the other guy has had a chance to do anything at all.

People are getting pretty stuck on flotilla activations, but they're pretty well implemented in my experience. I do think the Gozanti might be a point or two over costed with respect to the GR-75, but otherwise I have no problem with flotilla fillers. They put more ships on the table making the game look cooler, serve interesting roles, increase the complexity of the activation order game which I think is a huge piece of this game, provide great filler squadron activations, and counterbalance ECM in the accuracy mini-meta.

Ard, it's optional. You don't HAVE to pass, so if you choose to pass over and over and over and get shelled, that's your problem. That's why I like it as a mechanic: it's giving options back to the guy with less activations, as the guy with more inherently has more options.

And to address the comment from Kristjan, I agree Demolisher remains powerful in that framework, but is that a loss if you are re-incentivizing people to take a larger variety of fleets and can still spam flotillas as blockers? I think the problem now is that the meta is quickly coalescing towards activation spam with flotilla padding in at least part, if not full, and if the Armada meta continues down this path we end up locked at approximately 134 points of squadrons + MSU and nobody plays large ships, full stop.

I would suggest that is why it's at least worth putting some thought into.

Borrow from IA. Make sure 2nd player has the ability to guarantee last movement. Demolisher solved.

Original post is ripe for even more activation abuse. I get to activate 3 flotillas and squad command my entire bomber screen and then activate a different ship as first player

Simple as said above: As Long as you have fewer activations left, you can choose to pass.

Wait, really? The Activation "issue" is not an issue but a core part of the game. If you spend all your points on two ships to have monsters then you sacrifice activations to get them. It's a core mechanism in many many miniature games and is not an issue unless you want to run type of list being the two Ship list. If there wasn't a punishment for bringing only two ships small ships would lose their value over all.

Why is everyone these days overreacting to the game mechanics instead of discussing how to solve your own problems with strategy and discuss with others on how to solve it.

If something you are doing doesn't work the best solution is very rarely change the core mechanics and should be first and foremost change your own play style to fit the mechanics of the game. If you are losing at chess do you talk about changing the rules to fit your play style? Personally I went and got a book on chess and worked with others to improve my game.

Another point I'd make is activation advantage often changes over the course of the game. Being down activations at the start often makes getting enemy ships off the table a priority.

I do get that large ships are currently suffering, not just large ships but even ships over 100 points. There is a lot of factors that are contributing to this. They way tournaments are structured is part of it, it safer to have your most expensive "ship" be your squadrons. It's a lot harder to kill 120+ points of squads than a big expensive ship.

I think this is not a good idea because it also hurts MSU lists and for some of the reasons already stated above. The reason people want this is because the amount of lists running 2-3+ flotillas are increasing and its getting annoying since it makes it almost impossible to table your opponent and punish them for taking weak ships. People are also starting to just put their admiral on a life boat and that flotilla just goofs off in the corner doing absolutely nothing! My solution for this is simple: make flotillas not count towards whether or not a player is considered tabled. If they bring 3 flotillas and 2 actual ships and lose those 2 actual ships they are tabled.

I think this is not a good idea because it also hurts MSU lists and for some of the reasons already stated above. The reason people want this is because the amount of lists running 2-3+ flotillas are increasing and its getting annoying since it makes it almost impossible to table your opponent and punish them for taking weak ships. People are also starting to just put their admiral on a life boat and that flotilla just goofs off in the corner doing absolutely nothing! My solution for this is simple: make flotillas not count towards whether or not a player is considered tabled. If they bring 3 flotillas and 2 actual ships and lose those 2 actual ships they are tabled.

Interesting considered the flotillas kind of straddle the line of full capital ship anyway. Also reinforces the fact that has always kept the capital ship game relevant, killing all the capital ships awards full points even if you never touch a fighter.

I think this is not a good idea because it also hurts MSU lists and for some of the reasons already stated above. The reason people want this is because the amount of lists running 2-3+ flotillas are increasing and its getting annoying since it makes it almost impossible to table your opponent and punish them for taking weak ships. People are also starting to just put their admiral on a life boat and that flotilla just goofs off in the corner doing absolutely nothing! My solution for this is simple: make flotillas not count towards whether or not a player is considered tabled. If they bring 3 flotillas and 2 actual ships and lose those 2 actual ships they are tabled.

Again I think you are all thinking about this wrong. From what I've read over the last few days you guys want to run a two ship with no squadrons, which is your choice, but the game mechanics punishes One-Horse-Ponies like those lists. You need to diversify your builds more and bring more rounded fleets.

Eh, I think activations are an interesting part of the game.

One problem I see up front with your rolling-activation proposal is that it would let/force someone with an all-flotilla build to activate their entire fleet at once. The flotilla activations are balanced around not being able to push very many squadrons at once to limit the size of their alpha strike--i.e., the supercarrier ISD1's can push up to six squadrons all at once for a sizeable alpha strike, but a flotilla can push no more than 4, best case. If you used your proposal, you could be looking at 14 TIE fighters getting thrown before the other guy has had a chance to do anything at all.

People are getting pretty stuck on flotilla activations, but they're pretty well implemented in my experience. I do think the Gozanti might be a point or two over costed with respect to the GR-75, but otherwise I have no problem with flotilla fillers. They put more ships on the table making the game look cooler, serve interesting roles, increase the complexity of the activation order game which I think is a huge piece of this game, provide great filler squadron activations, and counterbalance ECM in the accuracy mini-meta.

Ard, it's optional. You don't HAVE to pass, so if you choose to pass over and over and over and get shelled, that's your problem. That's why I like it as a mechanic: it's giving options back to the guy with less activations, as the guy with more inherently has more options.

I think the issue is is that players got use to the wave 2 of playing where you built two VSD's to kill ships and forced your opponents to have to come to you so they could earn some points and the. Just manhandled them when they got in range. Well the game has changed since then and the mechanics now punishes lists like those and I say good. The games were the Imperial player started in the corner at speed zero for the first round then at speed one forcing you to engage the. In the front arc was lame and very boring. There was no Tactics involved and relied on the muscles of the VSD.

Today you have to think of Tactics because the new releases forces you to think on your feet (hell I get my butt handed to me often when I play) and that is good. Movement, Activations, Squadron Commands are all just as important as how many dice you throw and that is very good for the game overall.

Embrace the game mechanics and you will be much happier than trying to relive the boring early days of Armada.

I think the issue is is that players got use to the wave 2 of playing where you built two VSD's to kill ships and forced your opponents to have to come to you so they could earn some points and the. Just manhandled them when they got in range. Well the game has changed since then and the mechanics now punishes lists like those and I say good. The games were the Imperial player started in the corner at speed zero for the first round then at speed one forcing you to engage the. In the front arc was lame and very boring. There was no Tactics involved and relied on the muscles of the VSD.

Today you have to think of Tactics because the new releases forces you to think on your feet (hell I get my butt handed to me often when I play) and that is good. Movement, Activations, Squadron Commands are all just as important as how many dice you throw and that is very good for the game overall.

Embrace the game mechanics and you will be much happier than trying to relive the boring early days of Armada.

My personal complaint with Flotillas is that people are doing what you described....just with Flotillas surrounded by a cloud of fighters.

Embrace the game mechanics and you will be much happier than trying to relive the boring early days of Armada.

Those were the glory days! Ackbar instilled fear, there were no "I hate squads" threads, and people whined when "My opponent didn't sit in front of my Xmas ISD so I couldn't kill anything!".

Some people don't want to change. Well the game is changing, and those people will be left behind like Jedi clinging to their dead religion and magic after Order 66.

But I do agree, people need to learn how to beat the high activation lists. The problem is when only MSU lists are being played and that is what this thread is hinting at I think.

I think the simplest fix is to take the rule FFG already uses in IA to address this exact problem:

If the opponent has more remaining activations than you, you can pass.

That lessens activation pressure (the n+1 activation has less value to a list) and greatly increases the value of large ships (because you can always delay to go last, so they don't get as horribly outmaneuvered). I think this would need to be playtested, but is likely to be a positive change for meta flexibility and the game.

would a pass mechanic undercut the benefits of undercutting points.

I love big ships and I can not lie. The low activation count is a detriment. Usually you need to play slower (speed) as to not over extend too hard.

delaying would be like essentially being speed 0 without the lack of defensive tokens and jumping potentially 3 speeds at in one go.

I feel big ships, should lose the speed 0 no defense token thing. let them sit and bully a wide area of the map. it would make ozzel much better too.

I actually like the speed 0 def token thing, but I think I would only have speed 0 turn off the evade token. Why can't an ISD that is parked brace for impact or redistribute shields? Making the change like this would allow big ships which rarely have evade to benefit most and small ships which typically have evade to benefit the least from a mechanic that stays on theme and also provides them a little help.

Beatty, without going fully down the game design rabbit hole, I would suggest that for alternate-activation games in general this problem has been seen over and over.

IA already got the fix I mentioned above for it, as what you end up with in games that tend not to have it is a meta that trends towards being locked at MSU as the activation dominance (and increased optionality) basically means you always want to play as many activations as you reasonably can.

I think we should be careful with Armada not to let the game go too far this way, or put differently, how would you feel about worlds in two years where nobody brings a large ship in the entire field, barring maybe one or two jokers at the very bottom?

Edit: I would also point out that the IA rule did not condense the game back down to just 2 super heroes. There is still a large value to having more activations, it's just not so overwhelming now that it becomes the sole guiding principle of list construction, which is where I am worried Armada is headed.

Borrow from IA. Make sure 2nd player has the ability to guarantee last movement. Demolisher solved.

Original post is ripe for even more activation abuse. I get to activate 3 flotillas and squad command my entire bomber screen and then activate a different ship as first player

This is the only suggestion that wknt radically change, and break, the game. The original poster's suggestion has game breaking changes, more than even the all flotilla uber activation.

Ive played a couple of games where we eliminated the squadron phase and really like it. We even made several other house rules and over all for us at least found it to increase the fun factor for our games.

Essentially, you just eliminate the squadron phase completely and treat squadrons like you do during deployment. You can activate 2 squadrons instead of activating a ship. Keeps flotillas relevant as a squad, unless it has rogue, can only move or shoot so using flotillas to activate squads is still very viable. But it allows capital ships with a light fighter screen to use those fighters to push back activating their big ships.

But the bomber lists would have massive activation advantage... sort of... if you want to activate b wings by themselves you'll only be able to move or shoot so unless they are in position already it presents drawbacks and activating 28 pts of b wings to essentially pass an activation is an expensive pass.

It adds another bonus to generic ties which i never see used anymore which is a shame.

My $0.02

I think we should be careful with Armada not to let the game go too far this way, or put differently, how would you feel about worlds in two years where nobody brings a large ship in the entire field, barring maybe one or two jokers at the very bottom?

Then I'll officially give-a-crap in 2 years time.

Assuming that FFG does nothing in the meantime to evolve the game further.

Which I inherently doubt.

..

Again, we have another post that doesn't want discourse or discussion in the classic sense. It has made its conclusion known in its title,. and thus it demands agreement.

I care not for it. The Title, the Subject, or the contents of said post. I hate this Negativity crap.

Flotillas were introduced by FFG in order to solve the activation issue.

If you choose not to add one or two cheap and versatile flotillas to your fleet these days, then you run the risk of being at a serious activation disadvantage.

If anything, fielding larger ships is now more viable than ever. Instead of taking raiders for extra activations, a player can take Gozantis and have extra points to use on ISDs or squadrons (which have become another large point of contention).

Flotillas are here to stay, and they allow you to more easily succeed competitively.

Edit: a word

I think this is not a good idea because it also hurts MSU lists and for some of the reasons already stated above. The reason people want this is because the amount of lists running 2-3+ flotillas are increasing and its getting annoying since it makes it almost impossible to table your opponent and punish them for taking weak ships. People are also starting to just put their admiral on a life boat and that flotilla just goofs off in the corner doing absolutely nothing! My solution for this is simple: make flotillas not count towards whether or not a player is considered tabled. If they bring 3 flotillas and 2 actual ships and lose those 2 actual ships they are tabled.

If that is an issue for you bring a small flotilla hunter like a CR90 or a Raider. They can hunt down that annoying flotilla that is running or force it to stay with the fleet where it is in danger. Hell, Rogue now let's you take Squadrons far away from the fleet and they can chase down that Flag Ship flotilla. Punish them for putting their Commander on a weak ship.

You're right, that is a valid strategy, but just know you're sinking at least as many points as that flotilla+commander costs and you still have a very low chance of killing it. Though I have had great and satisfying success with a CR90B with engine techs (now that I think about it, Quantum Storm is probably the best flotilla killer out there). But sending a raider or a rogue squadron or two will fail because of scatter and who doesn't bring Bright Hope?

I'm fine with flotillas but it gets really boring making a list and knowing you have to waste points on flotilla activations or face a disadvantage against the vast majority of lists. I think the reason for all this dissent is just people getting used to a shift in the meta. It happens with every game.

Again I think you are all thinking about this wrong. From what I've read over the last few days you guys want to run a two ship with no squadrons

Uh what? I never said that at all.