regarding fighter cover:

tried and tested method.

bomber build? then use 120-130 points of bomber squadrons.

fighter cover? then use 70-90 points of interceptor squadrons AND USE THE EFFIN SQUADRON COMMANDS TO BLAST THOSE BOMBERS APART.

use that fighter cover. you will be fine. honestly.

sample fighter covers in wave 3/4 (more options wave 5, like Snipe):

Rebels:

4 x x-wings, dash rendar, tycho celchu, 30 hullpoints, 23 antisquadron dice. ruthless Rieekan combo stuff.

5 x x-wings, moldy crow. 29 hullpoints, mass braces, 23 antisquadron dice.

tycho celchy, 3 x a-wings, dash rendar. mass counter and threat range. plus rieekan synergy.

Imperials:

darth vader, howlrunner, 6 x tie fighters. 26 hull points, escort with braces, up to 31 antisquadron dice.

darth vader, soontir fel, mauler mithel, 3 x tie interceptors; 20 hull points, but full autodamage/ scatter/braces/counters.

...or just howlrunner and 9 x tie fighters or whatever.

build your fighter squadron with the intent to dig through escorts and kill intel. force the bomber player to attack the squadrons due to that. ignore the idea of "tieing up squadrons", intel and grit have made that irrelevant. just shoot them dead! all you need to do is buy one or two turns that they are preoccupied with the squadrons instead of attacking your ships, so your ships can deal damage.

works like a charm. you dont have to say "i play 0 fighters/3-4 ties, OR i play full bombers". be creative.

This is the meaning of list countering: You take 70-90 points of anti fighter. Then go up against someone who decided to hedge their bets against needing fighter cover (some meta-gamer. They usually go 1-2 or 2-1 at best). And bam. 70-90/400 points basically useless. Tie Int battery die are really not useful vs ships.

Second. Against mass squadrons you really need more like 90 points. Yes, you do well using 90 pts to neuter their 130 points, but still. Its just not that fun. Who cares when you blow up one more B wing.

depends on your "anti fighter"

for rebels, anyway, yavaris whatever is more than capable of murdering the crap out of most things

even B-wings with their puny 3 blue dice for 14 points will ruin almost any squdron's day with a double-tap, nevermind with Toyrn farr chipping in.

and, ofc, they're freaking B-wings so all ships beware

but if you take like 9 tie interceptors, yeah their anti-ship contribution is going to be a bit low (4.5 damage average). Imp squadrons are pretty specialized between the bomber/spray anti-ship and interceptor all out anti-squadron (tie fighter is more balanced for points, but the poor bastards get diced badly), at least until the Defender shows up.

One possible solution, and a solution to its efficiency for tournaments, is to implement a Death Clock system. Each player has 1 hour to complete the game, 2 hours total, if a player goes over their allotted time, they lose. This would make having to many activations and squadrons a liability!

Activation shenanigans and squadrons balanced!

Edit: Why not implement the time limit for general games too, this would balance general play as well.

idk about everyone else, but I don't think I've ever played a game of Armada that's gone to time before the six game rounds have been completed

in each of our group's monthly tournaments, everyone seems to finish at least half an hour in advance

and that's with a lot of us running at least six squadrons

my last tournie had me sporting five ships (2 cr-90as, 1 support neb, 1 escort neb and a cute little Bright Hope), and something around 1 Wedge, 1 X, 1 Jan and 4 B-wings and we still never got close to time despite the cluster-**** ball of squadrons involved in every game

A game takes us about 2hrs and we are deliberately taking our time because were still learning the rules.

And i usually run like 10+ squadrons as rebels.

Raider I w/Kallus, Ordinance Experts, Flechette Torps, Impetuous=58 pts

Gladiator II w/Kallus, Ordinance Experts, Engine Techs, Assault Protons, Demolisher=92

Both these ships shred squadrons and, in the raider's case, shut them down, or in the gladiator's case, are threatening to ships.

I don't see how the GSD II with kallus is especially an anti-squadron ship (especially generics). OE only helps you roll against aces when you shoot them, and even then you're not packing Flichettes. Two dice is not enough to really hurt any non TIE Fighter-Interceptor squadron. I know, becuase one of the cap lists I tried was two GSDs with an Instigator raider and an ISD. The Instigator was destroyed in short order, I lost one of my GSDs, and my ISD was next with no casualties to the B-Wing ball.

Both the Yavaris itself and the B-Wings are pretty darn slow, especially since Yavaris can't have Boosted Comms so the B-Wings can't stray further than medium range from it.

The solution here is to not go at that fleet and just take a 5-5. That'll stop the Yavaris B-Wing Ball player from playing the list pretty quickly if he always gets stuck with a 5-5 and can't crack Top 8 standings. The problem with Armada, though--and it's a problem even at the level of Origins and Gencon based on my observations this past summer--is that some players will fly right into the teeth of their opponent's most ridiculous 5-5 lists. And now, instead of that player getting a 5-5 stalemate because of the nature of their list they've been gifted a free 10-0 win because their opponent was stupid enough to fly right into it.

The trouble, though, when you come against a list like that (and a couple waves ago it was Triple Vic Rhymer Ball or Double Vic Rhymer Ball + Glad) is that by refusing to engage them (where they have a huge advantage) and instead forcing them to settle for a 5-5 is that you also take a 5-5, which can ruin your tournament run as well and is an incredibly boring and unsatisfying way to spend 2.5 hours. But it's always better than the 9-2 / 10-1 you'd give your opponent if you flew right into their trap and let them fight the engagement on their terms with their slow overpowering list.

My opponent has a good chunk on his bid, and could probably make a better bid by dropping one squadron. He goes second, and his objective selection rewards defensive play enough that I have to push forward and engage just to try breaking even.

Fighters are just long range weapons the ships bring to the fight.

"their opponent was stupid enough to fly right into it."

I have found this to be a big player problem with most games. (a lot of players charge right in) no maneuver no tactics, no plans.....and most times their ships come into range of the whole other force peace meal...and not as a unit. players that keep their force fighting as a unit win.

Well as I said before I have heard about the squadron game and the ship game. /in which I reply losing the squadron game does not mean you won the ship game, and in the end the universal victory condition is the ship game.

That being said squadrons are a big part of the overall game. You don't have to take them, but you still have to take them in account. Be it in a small fighter screen, anti-squadron barrage, or using bombers for the majority of your list's firepower taking out their ships before they can take out yours.

I am putting up something out there for a subclass High and Low Investment and squadrons that can be either. The whole point is if this squadron goes into those squadron heavy lists like Rhymer ball or in a more squadron light list being a multi-roll or independent squadron.that doesn't need squadron commands to make them effective. Now in terms of efficiency High Investments work better in their roles but Low Investments are more for plugging in the holes that your ship heavy list might have be Low Investment Bombers to supplement your firepower, Low Investment Interceptors if you feel your ships are too vulnerable to Bombers, or Low Investment Escorts (with a Bomber Squadron or Two) IF you think your fleet lacks the speed or maneuverability.

"their opponent was stupid enough to fly right into it."

I have found this to be a big player problem with most games. (a lot of players charge right in) no maneuver no tactics, no plans.....and most times their ships come into range of the whole other force peace meal...and not as a unit. players that keep their force fighting as a unit win.

Yep, completely agreed. You hear about these sub-metas where Gallant Haven is considered to be an amazing title and it's because the Imperial players are stupid enough to fly right into it (with their TIEs right into the GH protecting fighter/bomber squadrons). Game after game after game, somehow expecting a different outcome. Derp. That's not a game problem, that's a player problem.

A lot of the current salty salty tears are due to player problems. Flotillas exist now. Bomber squadron approaches are more reliable now. Players are not adjusting and not bringing anti-flotilla and/or anti-squadron elements in their fleets and/or not using them well when they do bring them. And then they come here and they cry about how they can't keep using the exact same approaches they're used to and how they'd like the game to change so they can. It reminds me a lot of back in mid-wave 2 when DeMSU lists were becoming more popular and all the Ackbar conga line players just wanted to cry about it rather than change up their fleet. They just could not conceive of an answer to their problem that existed outside of continuing to run Ackbar and hoping somebody else would do the hard work of beating the DeMSU fleets for them. That's a player problem.

i actually stopped playing when Akbar came out so i thankfully never had to experience that problem. I saw the card and just shuttered.

Im glad hes not the ultimate and only commander now. Theres actually *gasp* OPTIONS!

I cannot agree with Snipafist more. When new stuff arrives, you can't just assume that the meta will remain exactly the same. The game GROWS, and managing slash using that growth is how you get better as a player. I don't hear anyone wanting to go back to a pre-Intel day with squadrons, because everyone has learned to manage alongside Intel. Similarly, 2 a wings isn't a real fighter screen anymore. You gotta get out there, try something new and more. Not adapting is what's causing more losses than "Squadrons are too good."

I feel there is a culprit in all this...

GR-75 and its 2 squadron activations.

Cheaper then the imperial flotilla and more effective cards to support it.

The imperials really needed the flotilla to be more competetive.

But they got the sucky version...

Which is rediculous considering these things are advertised in game and lore as carriers.

Why is a refitted rusty transport ship better?

This in my opinion is what skewed the game, one wrong release is all it takes.

I feel there is a culprit in all this...

GR-75 and its 2 squadron activations.

Cheaper then the imperial flotilla and more effective cards to support it.

The imperials really needed the flotilla to be more competetive.

But they got the sucky version...

Which is rediculous considering these things are advertised in game and lore as carriers.

Why is a refitted rusty transport ship better?

This in my opinion is what skewed the game, one wrong release is all it takes.

this iimplies that the game is in a bad state.

i think otherwise. the regionals show interesting results. the 41% of attendants are imperials, the 39% in the top 4 are imperials(i.e. equal in proportion the the attendance), and the 33% of the winners are imperials(i.e. in winners, imperials are behind, but close enough to rebels compared to low attendance).

the culprit is people blaming flotillas for their shortcomings.

the world champ uses admonition to obliterate everything and "he won due to OP flotillas".

people bring "few huge unsupported ships" , tailored to beat other "big ship lists" and they lose because "flotillas OP".

people bring 2 ISDs, lose to a player with 2 flotillas 1 raider and 1 x ISD (pumped to ridiculousness due to the flotilla support due to comms net, activations, ease of command etc) and they dont understand.

people bring DeMSU lists with 2-4 tie fighters as fighter screen, not even giving them squadron command help, and complain squadrons are OP.

one of my opponents actualy INSISTED on hunting down bright hope with demolisher, despite my warnings (friendly game); he had a VSD with H9s on his list(afterwards, he told me he didnt even know how important antiflotilla tech H9 is, he just put it due to points) infinately better suited to the task, and didnt use it to hunt the flotilla. and then he complained that "flotillas OP".

flotillas are support ships.

support trumps anything and everything in gaming.

ergo,its natural that flotillas will be used until other proper support ships arrive. this doesnt mean that FFG should make a dumb, shallow game , lessening support options and combos to satisfy players that cannot adapt to the meta. until then-watch closely and see that big ships are NOT unplayable (ISDs are played 1-5% less, like wow), and that badass gunships like gladiators and mc30s still kick arse.

I wish I could like Kikaze's post 10 more times.

I wish I could like Kikaze's post 10 more times.

support trump

I just wanted to bash with Cap Ships. Unfortunately....

That said. Nothing is OP.

I wish I could like Kikaze's post 10 more times.

support trump

support trumps anything and everything in gaming.

ergo,its natural that flotillas will be used until other proper support ships arrive. this doesnt mean that FFG should make a dumb, shallow game , lessening support options and combos to satisfy players that cannot adapt to the meta. until then-watch closely and see that big ships are NOT unplayable (ISDs are played 1-5% less, like wow), and that badass gunships like gladiators and mc30s still kick arse.

I wouldn't say support trumps anything and everything all the time in every strategy game. It depends on much resources you're spending on the support relative to a) how much the support is improving the efficiency of the rest of your assets, and b) how much the support contributes on it's own. To use X-wing as an example (because that's what I know best at the moment), the "Palp Shuttle" and Manaroo are both powerful support ships, but X-wing also has a lot of gimicky Rebel support pilots that don't see competitive play because they frequently fail to contribute on their own, but they don't improve your other ships' performance enough to justify taking them over a ship that is solid by itself.

Like, if you want to use a large number of squadrons and actually activate them and not just spam YT-2400s, you are gonna have to have flotillas. They helped the game a lot more than they helped. They might be a touch cheap.

support trump

I should work in politics

Support stuff in any game is always viewed as OP or UP. Theyre either OP because theyre doing their job well and arent getting dealt with or UP because someone found an easy counter.

Video game, board game, miniature games, doesnt matter. Supports are never "balanced" in the players' eye.

On the contrary, I actually think the ISDs are having the time of their lives right now; at least the II because of the 4 natural blues they can throw out at medium range, Gunnery Teams and Kallus.

I'm literally 50/50 right now on bringing either ISD-II or my squid cigar to Regionals this year.

IMO, the ISD-II is much more effective now than ever before, because it can severely damage squadrons, flotillas and capital ships much more than in the past. Think about the Wave 2 meta, where you might be slugging it out with bigger ships and limited targets on the field to shoot at. Now, your target meta is medium-sized ships that are weak vs. accuracies and you can potentially one-shot and kill 2 of them per turn, severely cripple or maim a lone capital ship, or spray down an entire field of squadrons with 2 blues/Kallus/Leading Shots, OR preform any combination of the three because you have Gunnery Teams.

It's a good time to be an ISD, just letting you know. The 4 natural squadron and plentiful upgrade slots also allows you to dual-up as a carrier. There's just no other ship like it in the game yet; and that's a very good thing. You guys just gotta appreciate the ship for what it does and what it can do rather than what it can't.

You guys just gotta appreciate the ship for what it does and what it can do rather than what it can't.

Die heinously to 2/3 the points without ever getting a chance to shoot?

You guys just gotta appreciate the ship for what it does and what it can do rather than what it can't.

Die heinously to 2/3 the points without ever getting a chance to shoot?

Toot toot here comes the hyperbole train, all aboard.