I think this is relevant as well.

https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/topic/240218-please-use-evidence/

Now if you are looking for house rules, that's fine. I'd be glad to help with that. But if you are looking for a global rule change, well, that's a problem.

Why? Why can't he express desire for a global rule change? Isn't that exactly what people say to do instead of complain? The only response to a request for redress of grievances is "shut up and just do a house change"?

I find such responses dismissive. I think that kikaze's arguments are good and the post is great. Nevertheless, the a priori stance of "this is the way it is so you can't want something different or think that something else might be better" is offputting.

Now, all this said, I don't think you meant to be that way. I like your posts and I like you. I am probably responding more to the numerous posts by a number of posters that reflect this attitude.

Rock on!

His argument consisted of, " I dont like the trend of flotilla stacking in order to gain advantage through a couple of cheap nonsense activations. It does just not feel right .

They have enough utility even if they activate after all ships have activated.

Also, having a flotilla as the designated flagship is nonsense . None of those qualify as good arguments for officially changing the rules for a game. They are great arguments for house ruling it though.

So... how about them sportball!

Or a squadron?

I think this is relevant as well.

https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/topic/240218-please-use-evidence/

Now if you are looking for house rules, that's fine. I'd be glad to help with that. But if you are looking for a global rule change, well, that's a problem.

Why? Why can't he express desire for a global rule change? Isn't that exactly what people say to do instead of complain? The only response to a request for redress of grievances is "shut up and just do a house change"?

I find such responses dismissive. I think that kikaze's arguments are good and the post is great. Nevertheless, the a priori stance of "this is the way it is so you can't want something different or think that something else might be better" is offputting.

Now, all this said, I don't think you meant to be that way. I like your posts and I like you. I am probably responding more to the numerous posts by a number of posters that reflect this attitude.

Rock on!

His argument consisted of, " I dont like the trend of flotilla stacking in order to gain advantage through a couple of cheap nonsense activations. It does just not feel right .

They have enough utility even if they activate after all ships have activated.

Also, having a flotilla as the designated flagship is nonsense . None of those qualify as good arguments for officially changing the rules for a game. They are great arguments for house ruling it though.

I don't like the trend of flotilla stacking in order to gain advantage though a couple of cheap nonsense activations. (I should have said [Although legal,]) it just does not feel right. - That's what you call an opinion. You'll notice I didn't preface that opinion with:

Players who chose to flotilla their admiral and stick him in the corner are rules manipulating cowards that don't deserve the title of "player.".....that's effectively how these "pro-Floats" opinions were delivered.

Flagship. Lead of the Fleet. Boat in Charge. The One That Hurts. Again, stating that is a nonsense is an opinion. It's also an opinion I didn't preface with:

If anyone thinks flotillas should be allowed to act as flagships are too ignorant of ample examples that disqualify that logic......which is effectively how opinions were presented (v2.0) here today.

They might not be good arguments for global, sweeping changes to the rules. But they are my opinions. They're also not opinions I went on about for, literally, pages on a post that was established as the opposite of my opinion. I did not attack, make assumptions about, insinuate the skill level of, or otherwise demean anyone on that thread.....

UNLIKE A HIGH FREQUENCY OF THE PRO-FLOAT CROWD, WHICH I CALLED OUT AND GOT CRUCIFIED FOR.

I just like to add Flotillas to fleets for flavor, much like any other ship. I currently just have one for each side, and they mostly just command bomber flights as their offensive capability, though I plan on experimenting with Slicer tools or the ranged repair sometime. No Admirals, ever.

Luckily, I only get to play with a close-knit circle of people, so we get the benefit of having like-minded people driving the meta. Hell, if I spam anything, it's CR90's. If I am going to have a large number of small ships in a fleet, I want ones that are a helluva lot more combat-capable than flotillas.

I think it is time to remind everyone of the ignore feature here on the forums. If someone seems to push your buttons so much that you can't stand but respond to a point that things spiral out of control, simply set them to be ignored. I say this to BOTH sides of this argument. If our intrepid warrior for the rights of those who wish to change the game without resistance from others can't stand to hear from his 'elitist' adversaries, he may simply put them on ignore and not have to hear from them anymore. On the flip side, if those who wish to see nothing change because they believe the rules work as is and don't like the idea of changing them don't want to listen to continued debates about how they should be changed, then they can use the ignore feature as well.

Personally, I don't think anything needs to change with flotillas and commanders. They work as they are. The idea of a fleet commander hanging out on a tiny support ship seems a bit off, but it is easily turned against the player that does it so a rules change is kind of ridiculous. I find it sad that there are those who feel that others are so aggressive in their opinion that they need to one up them to the point of being downright insulting and calling people names, while doing the exact same things they accuse others of. That said, if anyone reaches the point of being unbearable, then the ignore feature can and should be used.

Most importantly, lets all have fun playing Armada.

I just like to add Flotillas to fleets for flavor, much like any other ship. I currently just have one for each side, and they mostly just command bomber flights as their offensive capability, though I plan on experimenting with Slicer tools or the ranged repair sometime. No Admirals, ever.

Luckily, I only get to play with a close-knit circle of people, so we get the benefit of having like-minded people driving the meta. Hell, if I spam anything, it's CR90's. If I am going to have a large number of small ships in a fleet, I want ones that are a helluva lot more combat-capable than flotillas.

Hey man, I use em. They have some good stuffs you can bring to the fight.

I think this is relevant as well.

https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/topic/240218-please-use-evidence/

Now if you are looking for house rules, that's fine. I'd be glad to help with that. But if you are looking for a global rule change, well, that's a problem.

Why? Why can't he express desire for a global rule change? Isn't that exactly what people say to do instead of complain? The only response to a request for redress of grievances is "shut up and just do a house change"?

I find such responses dismissive. I think that kikaze's arguments are good and the post is great. Nevertheless, the a priori stance of "this is the way it is so you can't want something different or think that something else might be better" is offputting.

Now, all this said, I don't think you meant to be that way. I like your posts and I like you. I am probably responding more to the numerous posts by a number of posters that reflect this attitude.

Rock on!

His argument consisted of, " I dont like the trend of flotilla stacking in order to gain advantage through a couple of cheap nonsense activations. It does just not feel right .

They have enough utility even if they activate after all ships have activated.

Also, having a flotilla as the designated flagship is nonsense . None of those qualify as good arguments for officially changing the rules for a game. They are great arguments for house ruling it though.

I don't like the trend of flotilla stacking in order to gain advantage though a couple of cheap nonsense activations. (I should have said [Although legal,]) it just does not feel right. - That's what you call an opinion. You'll notice I didn't preface that opinion with:

Players who chose to flotilla their admiral and stick him in the corner are rules manipulating cowards that don't deserve the title of "player.".....that's effectively how these "pro-Floats" opinions were delivered.

Flagship. Lead of the Fleet. Boat in Charge. The One That Hurts. Again, stating that is a nonsense is an opinion. It's also an opinion I didn't preface with:

If anyone thinks flotillas should be allowed to act as flagships are too ignorant of ample examples that disqualify that logic......which is effectively how opinions were presented (v2.0) here today.

They might not be good arguments for global, sweeping changes to the rules. But they are my opinions. They're also not opinions I went on about for, literally, pages on a post that was established as the opposite of my opinion. I did not attack, make assumptions about, insinuate the skill level of, or otherwise demean anyone on that thread.....

UNLIKE A HIGH FREQUENCY OF THE PRO-FLOAT CROWD, WHICH I CALLED OUT AND GOT CRUCIFIED FOR.

You'd have to take that up with those that chose to attack you. I respectfully, at least I think it was respectfully, addressed a poster that claimed your argument was a good one. In my opinion it was not even remotely a good argument for changing the rules. I didn't take any particular issue with, nor attack your opinion or you.

I think it is time to remind everyone of the ignore feature here on the forums. If someone seems to push your buttons so much that you can't stand but respond to a point that things spiral out of control, simply set them to be ignored. I say this to BOTH sides of this argument. If our intrepid warrior for the rights of those who wish to change the game without resistance from others can't stand to hear from his 'elitist' adversaries, he may simply put them on ignore and not have to hear from them anymore. On the flip side, if those who wish to see nothing change because they believe the rules work as is and don't like the idea of changing them don't want to listen to continued debates about how they should be changed, then they can use the ignore feature as well.

Personally, I don't think anything needs to change with flotillas and commanders. They work as they are. The idea of a fleet commander hanging out on a tiny support ship seems a bit off, but it is easily turned against the player that does it so a rules change is kind of ridiculous. I find it sad that there are those who feel that others are so aggressive in their opinion that they need to one up them to the point of being downright insulting and calling people names, while doing the exact same things they accuse others of. That said, if anyone reaches the point of being unbearable, then the ignore feature can and should be used.

Most importantly, lets all have fun playing Armada.

I like how logic finally prevails and NOW it's time to be quiet and stop talking about it.

Based solely on this thread, I bet I can accurately predict who people voted for....if they're American....and if they can vote. This was just like a cookie cutter discussion on the state of American politics today.

You'd have to take that up with those that chose to attack you. I respectfully, at least I think it was respectfully, addressed a poster that claimed your argument was a good one. In my opinion it was not even remotely a good argument for changing the rules. I didn't take any particular issue with, nor attack your opinion or you.

You're right. I misinterpreted what was said and to whom it was said. I apologize. As you might imagine, after a day of this, I'm a little tightly wound.

I think it is time to remind everyone of the ignore feature here on the forums. If someone seems to push your buttons so much that you can't stand but respond to a point that things spiral out of control, simply set them to be ignored. I say this to BOTH sides of this argument. If our intrepid warrior for the rights of those who wish to change the game without resistance from others can't stand to hear from his 'elitist' adversaries, he may simply put them on ignore and not have to hear from them anymore. On the flip side, if those who wish to see nothing change because they believe the rules work as is and don't like the idea of changing them don't want to listen to continued debates about how they should be changed, then they can use the ignore feature as well.

Personally, I don't think anything needs to change with flotillas and commanders. They work as they are. The idea of a fleet commander hanging out on a tiny support ship seems a bit off, but it is easily turned against the player that does it so a rules change is kind of ridiculous. I find it sad that there are those who feel that others are so aggressive in their opinion that they need to one up them to the point of being downright insulting and calling people names, while doing the exact same things they accuse others of. That said, if anyone reaches the point of being unbearable, then the ignore feature can and should be used.

Most importantly, lets all have fun playing Armada.

I like how logic finally prevails and NOW it's time to be quiet and stop talking about it.

Based solely on this thread, I bet I can accurately predict who people voted for....if they're American....and if they can vote. This was just like a cookie cutter discussion on the state of American politics today.

I'm curious what 'logic' you believe prevailed here. The fact is, your continued battling hasn't changed, nor has the opinion of those with whom you have fought. There is certainly no agreement in this thread, including in my very post that you quote. I simply am reminding people that if they reach a point of being unable to stand someone, they can put them on ignore and move on with their lives. You may choose to see a political angle on that if you choose, have fun with that.

You'd have to take that up with those that chose to attack you. I respectfully, at least I think it was respectfully, addressed a poster that claimed your argument was a good one. In my opinion it was not even remotely a good argument for changing the rules. I didn't take any particular issue with, nor attack your opinion or you.

You're right. I misinterpreted what was said and to whom it was said. I apologize. As you might imagine, after a day of this, I'm a little tightly wound.

Okay this is not meant in a bad way AT ALL. After reading (and I tried to respond to the original post sincerely) this entire thread now it totally seems like you are really ticked off today. This back and forth with others and responding to every single post with venom really doesn't help in my opinion.

Holy smokes!

I'm gone to work for a little while and everyone gets delusions of grandeur!

Didn't we all already not agree on this topic...?

"Pro-Float Crowd"

https://youtu.be/OPdDdC4go6c

Hey, if you REALLY want to make those little ***** annoying, try this:

Gozanti

Suppressor

Slicers

Minister Tua

ECMs

Not quite the same as hiding your Admiral in the corner, but really hard to kill.

I think it is time to remind everyone of the ignore feature here on the forums. If someone seems to push your buttons so much that you can't stand but respond to a point that things spiral out of control, simply set them to be ignored. I say this to BOTH sides of this argument. If our intrepid warrior for the rights of those who wish to change the game without resistance from others can't stand to hear from his 'elitist' adversaries, he may simply put them on ignore and not have to hear from them anymore. On the flip side, if those who wish to see nothing change because they believe the rules work as is and don't like the idea of changing them don't want to listen to continued debates about how they should be changed, then they can use the ignore feature as well.

Personally, I don't think anything needs to change with flotillas and commanders. They work as they are. The idea of a fleet commander hanging out on a tiny support ship seems a bit off, but it is easily turned against the player that does it so a rules change is kind of ridiculous. I find it sad that there are those who feel that others are so aggressive in their opinion that they need to one up them to the point of being downright insulting and calling people names, while doing the exact same things they accuse others of. That said, if anyone reaches the point of being unbearable, then the ignore feature can and should be used.

Most importantly, lets all have fun playing Armada.

I like how logic finally prevails and NOW it's time to be quiet and stop talking about it.

Based solely on this thread, I bet I can accurately predict who people voted for....if they're American....and if they can vote. This was just like a cookie cutter discussion on the state of American politics today.

I'm curious what 'logic' you believe prevailed here. The fact is, your continued battling hasn't changed, nor has the opinion of those with whom you have fought. There is certainly no agreement in this thread, including in my very post that you quote. I simply am reminding people that if they reach a point of being unable to stand someone, they can put them on ignore and move on with their lives. You may choose to see a political angle on that if you choose, have fun with that.

Sure. The logic in what I've been saying this entire time. Literally, this entire time. That it's ok to have an opinion. It's not ok to enter a thread with hostile intent and proceed to cram that opinion down everyones throat while padding it with veiled insults, insinuations, assumptions, and outright statements to their quality of play.

I didn't spend this entire time pushing an opinion. I spent this entire time defending myself from the very things I just described, as anyone should. I might not have maintained the "moral high ground" since I have no problem getting in the mud and wrestling....so to speak...but I stand justified, no matter if you see or admit it or not.

You'll notice that once this flock of insulting....fascists....were not validated by additional people, they quickly ran off (and actually continued but I decided not to pursue), although to bookend the conversation, Beatty was nice enough to go out the same way he came in....with an assumption about someone he knows nothing about.

The forums might have an ignore function but life doesn't. The rise of "ignoring" everything that you don't like has resulted in the most ignorant, ill informed global society the world has ever seen. Yes, global politics and forums are a stretch to piece together until you point out that once you get in the habit of just ignoring everything you don't like, you'll eventually find yourself surrounded with only people who agree with you. Only sites that agree with you. Only posts that agree with you.

When that happens, personal growth, learning, and healthy opinions die......so no, I will not ignore people who disagree with me. I'll either debate the disagreement or we'll see eye to eye and either not talk to each other about certain things or avoid each other all together.

Unless, of course, I've been ignored, in which case my point proves itself.

I can see political leanings in peoples behavior because I've seen the behavior many, many times before. Judging by the mentality on prevalent display in this thread, the way some people go about speaking to each other, myself, or on the topic, the way they frame their statements, the way they respond to (or completely ignore) some data.... eventually it all speaks volumes.

We had 1.5 pages of debate and 7.5 pages of gibberish as people confused insulting with opinion and then took turns continuing to be insulting because I chose not to roll over and take it.

Just another days work.

I think we ended on "pro-Floats" should have a thread to discuss why Flotillas are legal and "Anti-Floats" should have a thread to discuss changes to the rules to see what they can come up with....that won't affect "pro-Floats" at all since it's not like FFG is going to turn around and release a rules update....something it would behoove certain people to remember before they take discussions of unit gameplay so personally.

You'd think it fairly simple to not come over to each others house and piss in the living room, then explain why it's ok but apparently it is not......it'd be nice if we could just talk about it.

My problem is that people who are pro-flotilla have a high frequency of behaving like overly aggressive, over caffeinated, elitist, angst filled teenagers instead of carrying on a debate about it, offering suggestions for possible compromises or counter points.

What cracks me up is when they take the stance of "you can't kill it and don't want to change" without realizing that without being able to defend it beyond "it's legal" it's essentially the same stance from the other perspective. "You can't be effective without it and don't want to change."

It truly is mind boggling.

I reiterate my solution.....Admiral abilities do not apply outside of range 5....just like everything else in the game. At least then the flotilla would be a part of the fleet.

This first sentence of the above quote is the first time anyone took a personal shot at others in this thread. Top post of page 2. He who throws the first stone.

Sure. The logic in what I've been saying this entire time. Literally, this entire time. That it's ok to have an opinion. It's not ok to enter a thread with hostile intent and proceed to cram that opinion down everyones throat while padding it with veiled insults, insinuations, assumptions, and outright statements to their quality of play.

I didn't spend this entire time pushing an opinion. I spent this entire time defending myself from the very things I just described, as anyone should. I might not have maintained the "moral high ground" since I have no problem getting in the mud and wrestling....so to speak...but I stand justified, no matter if you see or admit it or not.

You'll notice that once this flock of insulting....fascists....were not validated by additional people, they quickly ran off (and actually continued but I decided not to pursue), although to bookend the conversation, Beatty was nice enough to go out the same way he came in....with an assumption about someone he knows nothing about.

The forums might have an ignore function but life doesn't. The rise of "ignoring" everything that you don't like has resulted in the most ignorant, ill informed global society the world has ever seen. Yes, global politics and forums are a stretch to piece together until you point out that once you get in the habit of just ignoring everything you don't like, you'll eventually find yourself surrounded with only people who agree with you. Only sites that agree with you. Only posts that agree with you.

When that happens, personal growth, learning, and healthy opinions die......so no, I will not ignore people who disagree with me. I'll either debate the disagreement or we'll see eye to eye and either not talk to each other about certain things or avoid each other all together.

Unless, of course, I've been ignored, in which case my point proves itself.

I can see political leanings in peoples behavior because I've seen the behavior many, many times before. Judging by the mentality on prevalent display in this thread, the way some people go about speaking to each other, myself, or on the topic, the way they frame their statements, the way they respond to (or completely ignore) some data.... eventually it all speaks volumes.

Can you not see how you are accusing others of suppressing people's rights to their opinion, while in the very same post telling us that what you see as right and wrong should be obeyed by all? Stating that it's OK to have an opinion, but it's not OK to push that opinion on others is a blatant contradiction because you are pushing your opinion of what is OK onto others. And by doing so, with colorful and aggressive insults (elitists, fascists, etc.), you are inviting response and confrontation on yourself.

The fact is, this post is titled "proposal to change the rules" and folks come in here saying why they didn't think it was needed, nor wanted by most others. A rules change would affect EVERYONE who plays this game and therefor people believe that have the right to weigh in on that. I choose to agree with that right. You chose to accuse those people of behaving as overly aggressive, over caffeinated, elitist, angst filled teenagers and war ensued.

As for the political commentary, well, you have the right to your opinion there. Some of it makes sense, but truthfully it's not really relevant to the topic at hand so that's really all I will say about that.

I like how logic finally prevails and NOW it's time to be quiet and stop talking about it.

Based solely on this thread, I bet I can accurately predict who people voted for....if they're American....and if they can vote. This was just like a cookie cutter discussion on the state of American politics today.

I'll take that bet.

Did someone actually try to bring politics on into the discussion and judge people's political leanings from a discussion on a game and then use that information to assert moral authority over others because of their own political opinions?

Oh, there is definitely a Troll loose! Everyone hide your belongings, a Troll is loose!

My problem is that people who are pro-flotilla have a high frequency of behaving like overly aggressive, over caffeinated, elitist, angst filled teenagers instead of carrying on a debate about it, offering suggestions for possible compromises or counter points.

What cracks me up is when they take the stance of "you can't kill it and don't want to change" without realizing that without being able to defend it beyond "it's legal" it's essentially the same stance from the other perspective. "You can't be effective without it and don't want to change."

It truly is mind boggling.

I reiterate my solution.....Admiral abilities do not apply outside of range 5....just like everything else in the game. At least then the flotilla would be a part of the fleet.

This first sentence of the above quote is the first time anyone took a personal shot at others in this thread. Top post of page 2. He who throws the first stone.

Sure. The logic in what I've been saying this entire time. Literally, this entire time. That it's ok to have an opinion. It's not ok to enter a thread with hostile intent and proceed to cram that opinion down everyones throat while padding it with veiled insults, insinuations, assumptions, and outright statements to their quality of play.

I didn't spend this entire time pushing an opinion. I spent this entire time defending myself from the very things I just described, as anyone should. I might not have maintained the "moral high ground" since I have no problem getting in the mud and wrestling....so to speak...but I stand justified, no matter if you see or admit it or not.

You'll notice that once this flock of insulting....fascists....were not validated by additional people, they quickly ran off (and actually continued but I decided not to pursue), although to bookend the conversation, Beatty was nice enough to go out the same way he came in....with an assumption about someone he knows nothing about.

The forums might have an ignore function but life doesn't. The rise of "ignoring" everything that you don't like has resulted in the most ignorant, ill informed global society the world has ever seen. Yes, global politics and forums are a stretch to piece together until you point out that once you get in the habit of just ignoring everything you don't like, you'll eventually find yourself surrounded with only people who agree with you. Only sites that agree with you. Only posts that agree with you.

When that happens, personal growth, learning, and healthy opinions die......so no, I will not ignore people who disagree with me. I'll either debate the disagreement or we'll see eye to eye and either not talk to each other about certain things or avoid each other all together.

Unless, of course, I've been ignored, in which case my point proves itself.

I can see political leanings in peoples behavior because I've seen the behavior many, many times before. Judging by the mentality on prevalent display in this thread, the way some people go about speaking to each other, myself, or on the topic, the way they frame their statements, the way they respond to (or completely ignore) some data.... eventually it all speaks volumes.

Can you not see how you are accusing others of suppressing people's rights to their opinion, while in the very same post telling us that what you see as right and wrong should be obeyed by all? Stating that it's OK to have an opinion, but it's not OK to push that opinion on others is a blatant contradiction because you are pushing your opinion of what is OK onto others. And by doing so, with colorful and aggressive insults (elitists, fascists, etc.), you are inviting response and confrontation on yourself.

The fact is, this post is titled "proposal to change the rules" and folks come in here saying why they didn't think it was needed, nor wanted by most others. A rules change would affect EVERYONE who plays this game and therefor people believe that have the right to weigh in on that. I choose to agree with that right. You chose to accuse those people of behaving as overly aggressive, over caffeinated, elitist, angst filled teenagers and war ensued.

As for the political commentary, well, you have the right to your opinion there. Some of it makes sense, but truthfully it's not really relevant to the topic at hand so that's really all I will say about that.

If that's what you took from it, I dunno what to tell you considering my opinion about opinions is that everyone is entitled to them but if you come into a thread with an opposing view with the "argument" that "our" (for linguistic reasons, not personal belief of me about this thread one way or another) view is wrong because "we're" (again, just diferentiating) are wrong because we're noobs, or because we don't understand flotillas, or we're bad is not an opinion. It's at best an instigation and at worse a minor form of verbal assault.

THAT is what my entire side of this "discussion" has been and if you simply go back to the front end of this 9 pages of stupidity and look at these instigators initial posts here, you might just find that I'm right...

Unless you can't be objective, in which case you'll just end up back here with another attempt to turn my position into "why flotillas are bad." again....it's not even about that....it hasn't been about flotillas since the second or third page.

It's been about you and/or people you're defending entering the conversation not with input but with opinions wrapped in self-serving insults and vague references to skill....for having a discussion, peacefully, among people idly discussing flotillas.

For the last time, since again we find ourselves requiring excessive repetition....my complaint has never been about the "opposing" idea that flotillas are good and fine the way they are. My input was a suggestion based on observations to help further the debate, even though I don't care one way or another.

I'm not so dependent on what others think of my opinions as to present it as "You just don't know anything, you're bad if you think xyz, etc" which is EXACTLY what this little cliche of e-cools did. They were insulting, demeaning, and down right rude but they certainly managed to unite with each other when one of we mere mortals stood up and said you don't get to talk to people like that unchallenged.

Sure, I don't go about it in the prettiest sounding way.....but I'm also not wrong, either.

The irony being is one of them even has the audacity to "end" this little discussion by regurgitating my own position in his own words before scampering off.

This entire conversation is ridiculous and I truly regret my part in it but some of those involved should be ashamed at how they treat others on these forums. At least 3 are guilty of this passive aggressive "opinion" nonsense across multiple threads and have been for weeks (and probably months, if not years).

Elitistism is a cancer in gaming and I'm disappointed some of the most influential voices here are self righteous trolls willing to talk through their nose to people....for having a different opinion than them.

Did someone actually try to bring politics on into the discussion and judge people's political leanings from a discussion on a game and then use that information to assert moral authority over others because of their own political opinions?

Oh, there is definitely a Troll loose! Everyone hide your belongings, a Troll is loose!

Sure did. You learn how to present an opinion without being insulting yet or are you still trying to turn this around on me like I was the one that presented myself better than everyone who dare disagree?

I like how logic finally prevails and NOW it's time to be quiet and stop talking about it.

Based solely on this thread, I bet I can accurately predict who people voted for....if they're American....and if they can vote. This was just like a cookie cutter discussion on the state of American politics today.

I'll take that bet.

You're too fresh in this mud. Roll around for awhile longer.

Dude listen to yourself! You're the Troll here! You have been nothing but hostile insisting you're the victim as you yourself are attacking everyone. Then you want to bring in non-game related conjectures about people's political beliefs? That is absolutely the actions of a Troll and everyone sees it.

Stick to he game talk and drop the attacks and you will absolutely get different results. Act like a spoiled child politician and you will be countered attacked. No one likes a Troll and You are being the Troll here today.

I bet you are just as much fun in person. Do people leave your games wanting to have a beer and a handshake? Are you friends after a game with a stranger? Are there lots of laughs through out a game even when it's a close game and blood pressure is running high? Because that describes my games and interactions.

Or do you leave silently pissed when you lose and gloat when you win? From your posts I can infer a lot about your behavior.

So...a little late to all this, has anyone considered that if an opponent puts their lifeboat in the corner just send a raider or corvette around the side to deal with it, or ignore their fleet and kill the lifeboat with everything and win by a small margin. Or accept that it's viable now but there will probably be a wave 6 mechanic to nerf it down(like a jamming signal to relay or something).