I think Hera and her bomber support would do just fine and maybe Dash since he gets his rerolls and has speed 4 to get back into the the fight afterwards.

You may want to update your prescription if that's what you're seeing. Cheer up Undead, you'll know gamey when you see it (harhar).

Beatty's suggestion is one of the most interesting I've seen around, an inverse Capture the VIP. Now that I like. I think I'll try that out some time. Thanks mate

Well I was surprised it wasn't in with the new Objectives in CC and it just seemed like a smart way to address some issues the community are arguing about. But then again all the objectives were written before Wave IV so there was no issues at that point. Maybe the next supplement. (Mind you I don't think flotillas are an issue but the use of Life Boats has been over played because of its newness. And if it remains over played we will see something to bring it in. FFG is good that way.)

It's not an issue. As I've said there were plenty of ways to deal with a flotilla before wave 5/CC now there are even more. If your not taking into account a way to destroy them in your builds you cannot then complain about them imo.

The Squadron solution, just needs to keep in mind that they deploy with 1-2 of a ship.

Im going with no. I think it is a valid tactic/strategy that should be appreciated. If you spend around 20-30 pts on a little boat and leave it way out of the fight... Thank you? Why would I be upset about that? Wish more locals would do that.

Against the spirit? Of what, being a tactical decision making Commander? Modern flagships are often smaller faster vessels then the rest of the fleet. This should make MORE sense.

...

It's not an issue. As I've said there were plenty of ways to deal with a flotilla before wave 5/CC now there are even more. If your not taking into account a way to destroy them in your builds you cannot then complain about them imo.

Well, ya' can't be a true Canadian. Canadians can complain about anything and everything including people's complaints about complaining or the lack thereof.

That said, it really isn't too much of an issue beyond the flagship being a motorized freight car. Flotillas are dreadfully annoying point for point (not horrendous, I rather like them) but the 'life boat' is a persistent niggling complaint. There is also that voice in the back of my head that says, "Shouldn't transports like GR-75's be really vulnerable to bombers? So why does it take so many to even scuff their rusty paint job?"

That said, dual bomber dice with blues are pretty pleasant threats, and Hera seems to be able to deliver a decent punch there and still work in a lot of other applications. I was sorta thinking of her and even some A wings, maybe green squadron (fluffy and 75 percent chance to at least go after the paint). It is a lot of points, but those are points that always work.

As for the 'command ships are smaller now', true but they're still frigates and not box cars. They're not exactly 'small', and my country's navy flgship -is- the largest operational warship we have.... it's just in port... with no functioning engines... because it's horrendously old.

As for the 'command ships are smaller now', true but they're still frigates and not box cars. They're not exactly 'small', and my country's navy flgship -is- the largest operational warship we have.... it's just in port... with no functioning engines... because it's horrendously old.

You mean its not currently involved in the "Whiskey War" with Denmark?

For shame.

Wow...late to the party on this discussion. Under the current meta, activation advantage is THE most important aspect of the game IMO. What is the best/easiest way to gain activation advantage???....Flotillas! They are cheap to buy, can be equipped to serve multiple roles in your fleet...one of which is a lifeboat/token dealer for an admiral. With the new Relay command, you will probably see even more commander flotillas flying off into nowhere as they can command squads from anywhere on the table. Flotillas are here to stay people, whether that is thematic to the game or not...especially in a tournament setting. If you haven't come to grips that tabling an opponent has become very hard to do now, then I'm afraid that the evolution of this game has moved beyond your enjoyment. For me however, it just adds to the complexity of this wonderful game that I enjoy!

Actually, whilst activation advantage is important, having multiple advantage can be detrimental.

Actually, whilst activation advantage is important, having multiple advantage can be detrimental.

Multiple advantage??? Please elaborate...

Seriously I think we should have had lifeboat shuttles.

Actually, whilst activation advantage is important, having multiple advantage can be detrimental.

Multiple advantage??? Please elaborate...

Well at some point you have to activate something that can do more than a Flotilla, you can't just keep activating things to avoid activating things.

So you can end up with two extremes, a build that has say 2 really big things or another that has 8 Flotillas.

Activation advantage is only important until engagement, it helps once, to engage on your own terms. After that, the important ships are jumping line anyway.

Simple solution would to rule a fleet to be tabled when it's last non-flotilla ship is destroyed.

Best idea for a FAQ update I've seen thus far.

So why should the entire game be changed so about half the community is happy, while the other half is angry? Doing any of the changes suggested in this thread would alienate the people who like to play MSU lists. Multiple Small Units. That means no large ships, maybe 1 medium. Why should I have to put my commander on my most expensive ship making it a bigger target? Makes more sense to spread my points out so if I lose a ship, I can still come out with an 8-3 or 9-2.

When I go to play at a tournament, I go there to win. If you want thematic games, play at home with your friends where you agree on changing the rules. But forcing this stupid, selfish change will hurt the game.

Suck it up and deal with it.

Horribly circular logic. Why should the game remain the way it is just because half the community doesn't like it and half the community does? At least think before you post.

Question. Let's say, hypothetically, a FAQ update prevents commanders from being placed on flotillas. Would you "Suck it up and deal with it" or would you charge to the forums QQ'n over it?

Scrolling through 6 pages, I've come up with the following:

This is an hot topic.

People like to argue.

What I find most shocking is how happy people are to use Earth bound tactics and ships as validation for this strategy. Have you no imagination or are you just determined to validate your opinion by any means necessary?

I'm not debating that, in Star Wars (the ENTIRE premise of Armada), leaders ride is small ships. Fast ships. Maneuverable ships. Kind of like Lando in RotJ.

They don't ride in bulk freighters. That's the real world equal to riding in a semi truck....in the middle of a tank battle......

Not always. I have a couple of fleet builds based around Raiders that rely on that activation advantage to have a ship in my range without the slightly fragile Raider getting annihilated before it gets its shots off. There's seven activations in those lists, and it really uses them for flexibility and area control. It also allows me to get double taps off with at least a pair of them.

Scrolling through 6 pages, I've come up with the following:

This is an hot topic.

People like to argue.

What I find most shocking is how happy people are to use Earth bound tactics and ships as validation for this strategy. Have you no imagination or are you just determined to validate your opinion by any means necessary?

I'm not debating that, in Star Wars (the ENTIRE premise of Armada), leaders ride is small ships. Fast ships. Maneuverable ships. Kind of like Lando in RotJ.

They don't ride in bulk freighters. That's the real world equal to riding in a semi truck....in the middle of a tank battle......

So the problem is just a rebel problem as my ffg card say that one Gonzanti is a cruiser and the other is an assault carrier. The empire doesn't send buses to the battle and for me to see a commander throwing orders from his relatively safe carrier seems pretty thematic.

So why should the entire game be changed so about half the community is happy, while the other half is angry? Doing any of the changes suggested in this thread would alienate the people who like to play MSU lists. Multiple Small Units. That means no large ships, maybe 1 medium. Why should I have to put my commander on my most expensive ship making it a bigger target? Makes more sense to spread my points out so if I lose a ship, I can still come out with an 8-3 or 9-2.

When I go to play at a tournament, I go there to win. If you want thematic games, play at home with your friends where you agree on changing the rules. But forcing this stupid, selfish change will hurt the game.

Suck it up and deal with it.

Horribly circular logic. Why should the game remain the way it is just because half the community doesn't like it and half the community does? At least think before you post.

Question. Let's say, hypothetically, a FAQ update prevents commanders from being placed on flotillas. Would you "Suck it up and deal with it" or would you charge to the forums QQ'n over it?

It would strike me as really bizarre that FFG took such a hamfisted approach to something that, from a competitive standpoint, is a non-issue. The commander lifeboat is a valid tactical option, sure, but it's hardly game breaking. If anything, I'd be concerned that FFG was allowing fluff to dictate mechanics in the tournament scene.

So why should the entire game be changed so about half the community is happy, while the other half is angry? Doing any of the changes suggested in this thread would alienate the people who like to play MSU lists. Multiple Small Units. That means no large ships, maybe 1 medium. Why should I have to put my commander on my most expensive ship making it a bigger target? Makes more sense to spread my points out so if I lose a ship, I can still come out with an 8-3 or 9-2.

When I go to play at a tournament, I go there to win. If you want thematic games, play at home with your friends where you agree on changing the rules. But forcing this stupid, selfish change will hurt the game.

Suck it up and deal with it.

Horribly circular logic. Why should the game remain the way it is just because half the community doesn't like it and half the community does? At least think before you post.

Question. Let's say, hypothetically, a FAQ update prevents commanders from being placed on flotillas. Would you "Suck it up and deal with it" or would you charge to the forums QQ'n over it?

It would strike me as really bizarre that FFG took such a hamfisted approach to something that, from a competitive standpoint, is a non-issue. The commander lifeboat is a valid tactical option, sure, but it's hardly game breaking. If anything, I'd be concerned that FFG was allowing fluff to dictate mechanics in the tournament scene.

As long as its fair and balanced what harm is it to allow fluff and theme to help dictate rules?

If anything, I'd be concerned that FFG was allowing fluff to dictate mechanics in the tournament scene.

Of course fluff must dictate mechanics. This is a Star Wars game and if it stops being Star Wars because the mechanics start coming before the theme, then the game is going to enter a sharp tail-spin.

To be honest, I don't think the idea of a fleet commander being in a smaller ship is that narrative breaking. I can imagine someone like Dodonna or Leia coordinating the battle hunched over a comms unit inside a gutted and refitted GR75. It gets a bit silly with someone like Ackbar hiding inside one, instead of being on the bridge of one of his Mon Cal cruisers, but you gotta take the good with the bad I guess.

If anything, I'd be concerned that FFG was allowing fluff to dictate mechanics in the tournament scene.

Of course fluff must dictate mechanics. This is a Star Wars game and if it stops being Star Wars because the mechanics start coming before the theme, then the game is going to enter a sharp tail-spin.

To be honest, I don't think the idea of a fleet commander being in a smaller ship is that narrative breaking. I can imagine someone like Dodonna or Leia coordinating the battle hunched over a comms unit inside a gutted and refitted GR75. It gets a bit silly with someone like Ackbar hiding inside one, instead of being on the bridge of one of his Mon Cal cruisers, but you gotta take the good with the bad I guess.

In fact, Dodonna leads the attack against the first Death Star without leaving the ground. Of course I am not sure if Yavin could be called a lifeboat. It was the easiest shot for the Death Star when it come to position of course XD

It isn't Dodonna's fault the Empire took the hard counter to his planet based command center.

Much like it isn't Tarkin's fault Dodonna took the a ton of bombers against his precision strike objective.

To be fair, theme should certainly inform mechanics, but not dictate them. Theme prevents the game from having a boarding system based on "beaming" over to the ship, but theme also gives us the diversity of ship styles and attack methods we have. Theme is important, but no more so than mechanics for keeping the gameplay sharp and fun. An admiral on a flotilla can be argued as thematic, but as a mechanic it's sound. Tactically, it creates choices for both sides, and there are plenty of options to counter it, and indeed counter the counters. That's why this game is so very interesting; there are a multitude of options available to players based on their playing style that simply don't exist in many other games.

However, to argue that admirals should be banned from flotillas "because reasons" - or to that effect of personal distaste rather than mechanical imbalances - is, in all effect, self serving and pointless. A change in the rules won't be made because of a conceptual belief in the logistics of a fictional universe, but they would if the game began to suffer as a result. As it stands, the latter has yet to happen, so to those who continue to find fault with it, I suggest you turn your considerable efforts in decrying the practice towards solidifying a counter to it. It may well be your only option for some time to come.

Scrolling through 6 pages, I've come up with the following:

This is an hot topic.

People like to argue.

What I find most shocking is how happy people are to use Earth bound tactics and ships as validation for this strategy. Have you no imagination or are you just determined to validate your opinion by any means necessary?

I'm not debating that, in Star Wars (the ENTIRE premise of Armada), leaders ride is small ships. Fast ships. Maneuverable ships. Kind of like Lando in RotJ.

They don't ride in bulk freighters. That's the real world equal to riding in a semi truck....in the middle of a tank battle......

So your entire premise is that Star wars fans are right, and miniature wargamers who happen to be flying star wars ships shall not exist?

Scrolling through 6 pages, I've come up with the following:

This is an hot topic.

People like to argue.

What I find most shocking is how happy people are to use Earth bound tactics and ships as validation for this strategy. Have you no imagination or are you just determined to validate your opinion by any means necessary?

I'm not debating that, in Star Wars (the ENTIRE premise of Armada), leaders ride is small ships. Fast ships. Maneuverable ships. Kind of like Lando in RotJ.

They don't ride in bulk freighters. That's the real world equal to riding in a semi truck....in the middle of a tank battle......

So your entire premise is that Star wars fans are right, and miniature wargamers who happen to be flying star wars ships shall not exist?

He didn't say that.

But this is a Star Wars game first and foremost. You're not going to see a Galaxy class starship, an ork filled rok or a Terran battlecruiser flying through the middle of the map.

This means the game needs to meet star wars themes, not Star trek, wh40k or StarCraft. So when rules are made they need to be fair and balanced, but also within theme.