1 hour ago, WhatsArmadaWithYou said:

I'm not sure its unfair, but it is unfortunate. I'm sure your time will come. I felt a similar way after the Regional last year and was basically on a personal mission to do better this year, which thankfully I did.

I can personally say that the level of play and the challenge has increased with each wave and tournament I've played. Great game that is a different challenge every time. Best of luck.

I think ginkapo was being a bit sarcastic/snarky and not actually upset.

I, on my end, did a solid OK at Milwaukee. 7-4,2-9,10-1. 6th place. The 2-9 loss felt almost entirely my fault because of 3 mistakes during the match. I say almost entirely, because my opponent did play smart and took advantage of those mistakes. Honestly 6th felt generous to me for a 19 point finish, but Milwaukee had a really tight field.

Me? Sarcastic? Never!

12 minutes ago, Ginkapo said:

Me? Sarcastic? Never!

You're not Sarcastic.

You're just British.

I can see that I will be busy with data entry this week. Hopefully I can get to it all before I head out of the country on Thursday.

Sounds like it was a great weekend for Armada.

10 hours ago, Ginkapo said:

Do you know whats unfair. I have beaten quite a lot of regional winners, often with their winning lists.

Cant do well at our regionals.

Not what I'm on about. I just feel that a tournament system where you can beat the 1st place person and still not be ahead of them is pretty... busted.

1 hour ago, n00bzilla99 said:

Not what I'm on about. I just feel that a tournament system where you can beat the 1st place person and still not be ahead of them is pretty... busted.

You know when first started doing tourneys for this game way back in wave 1, we had a guy that purposely made a list and tactic to beat the number 1 winner. Yet he was pretty weak against everything else. It should not be enough to just knock out the number one player because that might indicate that you have a list of strategy imbalance that only works for that circumstance. Hardly deserving of first.

32 minutes ago, Brikhause said:

You know when first started doing tourneys for this game way back in wave 1, we had a guy that purposely made a list and tactic to beat the number 1 winner. Yet he was pretty weak against everything else. It should not be enough to just knock out the number one player because that might indicate that you have a list of strategy imbalance that only works for that circumstance. Hardly deserving of first.

Except that's not what I did... I designed and flew a pretty well balanced fleet, and won all my games by 100+ points. The first by 299, the second by 120, and the third by 130. 23 points total. The first place person also got 23, then the tiebreaker was a MoV of 12. Despite one of his losses being to me by 120 points.

Apparently crushing 2 people is far more important than actually winning all your games.

Also I hardly think that going 9-2, 7-4, 7-4 indicates a strategy of imbalance and circumstantial winning.

27 minutes ago, n00bzilla99 said:

Except that's not what I did... I designed and flew a pretty well balanced fleet, and won all my games by 100+ points. The first by 299, the second by 120, and the third by 130. 23 points total. The first place person also got 23, then the tiebreaker was a MoV of 12. Despite one of his losses being to me by 120 points.

Apparently crushing 2 people is far more important than actually winning all your games.

Also I hardly think that going 9-2, 7-4, 7-4 indicates a strategy of imbalance and circumstantial winning.

And I would like to agree with this except when you need a system that encourages both having to establish dominance and therefore make players engage each other, and at the same time not take you out of contention from a loss the unfortunate side effect can sometimes be what you speak. I do believe that regionals events and above should always have a cut to top 2 regardless of rounds. It would have been exciting to see not Tyler, and Cory play another round in San Antonio in outer stream! It would also help remedy situations like what you speak of.

37 minutes ago, Brikhause said:

And I would like to agree with this except when you need a system that encourages both having to establish dominance and therefore make players engage each other, and at the same time not take you out of contention from a loss the unfortunate side effect can sometimes be what you speak. I do believe that regionals events and above should always have a cut to top 2 regardless of rounds. It would have been exciting to see not Tyler, and Cory play another round in San Antonio in outer stream! It would also help remedy situations like what you speak of.

Totally agree with this.

1 hour ago, n00bzilla99 said:

Except that's not what I did... I designed and flew a pretty well balanced fleet, and won all my games by 100+ points. The first by 299, the second by 120, and the third by 130. 23 points total. The first place person also got 23, then the tiebreaker was a MoV of 12. Despite one of his losses being to me by 120 points.

Apparently crushing 2 people is far more important than actually winning all your games.

Also I hardly think that going 9-2, 7-4, 7-4 indicates a strategy of imbalance and circumstantial winning.

So, what fix do you propose?

Do you think that the point cut lines are at the wrong place? That tourneys should be single-elimination? That the game is too long and rounds should be shortened to allow for more games? That ranking should be W/L first with tourney points as a tiebreaker?

I suspect that you're getting pushback because you've complained about the current system without giving an idea for how it could be done better. It's hard to engage constructively without proposed alternatives. If you offer a better idea, it gives your opinion more credibility because it demonstrates that you've actually put some thought into it, instead of just being salty over a close loss.

I think the current system is like democracy: it's the worst system except for all the others.

The only issue I see, that I would agree with is that if points are tied, head to head matchup might take precedence over MOV. Of course, at some point someone will have a massive MOV advantage and lose a 5-6 by a few points due to slow play and we'd have another argument.

Unless it's a big enough tourney for more rounds and some kind of cutoff/elimination round(s), any points system to determine ranking will have flaws, or at least tiebreaker mechanics that people will feel could be done better. Nature of the beast.

4 hours ago, Ardaedhel said:

So, what fix do you propose?

Do you think that the point cut lines are at the wrong place? That tourneys should be single-elimination? That the game is too long and rounds should be shortened to allow for more games? That ranking should be W/L first with tourney points as a tiebreaker?

I suspect that you're getting pushback because you've complained about the current system without giving an idea for how it could be done better. It's hard to engage constructively without proposed alternatives. If you offer a better idea, it gives your opinion more credibility because it demonstrates that you've actually put some thought into it, instead of just being salty over a close loss.

I think the current system is like democracy: it's the worst system except for all the others.

I would propose exactly that. W/L first including any head to head matchups with Tourney points and MoV as the tiebreakers.

Just now, n00bzilla99 said:

I would propose exactly that. W/L first including any head to head matchups with Tourney points and MoV as the tiebreakers.

Okay, thanks. But that brings us back to the problem Brik mentioned, then: how do you disincentivize the fortressing behavior that everyone hates because it leads to boring games? That already happens sometimes with a system that only rewards large-margin victories, and we would only expect the phenomenon to be worse if W/L were the overall win condition.

I suppose there could be a lower-level in-game mechanic changed or introduced to disincentivize castling under a W/L paradigm, but I have no idea what that might look like.

Honestly, the real fix is that you need another round of play.

The FFG tournament format is great when you have 8 players, and also great at major events with 5-ish rounds and a cut. Where it really breaks down is regionals, because when 32 people play 3 rounds, you can have:

16 undefeated -> 8 undefeated -> 4 undefeated.

It's unrealistic, but seriously, if you had a regional with 10-1, 7-4, 8-3 winners or so in all four of the top spots, it's actually possible that none of them ever played each other and now you have this train wreck of random chance. My suggestion would be that, at premiere events, if you have 16+ players, you play 4 rounds. This is especially true because many events have the guy at the bottom who is very new to the game and accidentally decides the tournament, because whichever of the top 4-ish players or so drew him in the randomly paired first round and blew him apart 10-1 probably wins it all as long as they control later results. I would suggest you don't want to discourage people from playing, so you should extend the bracket.

I think that irons out most of the weird situations. There are still some edge cases, but it's a lot harder to go undefeated and beat the #1 guy and lose in four rounds unless he somehow narrowly lost to you and absolutely obliterated 3 other people (including, in rounds 3 & 4, the top folks most likely).

OK, I don't have time at the moment to put together every list. However, I got the top 4 (out of 16) together for immediate entry. I will work to write up the remaining lists later when I'm not on vacation.

You may notice a trend here. And that trend is: Rebels don't show up until 7th place. Yikes! I came in a gloriously prominent 13th.

1st place

Ryan Anderson - 400/400

Imperial-1 Star Destroyer

Admiral Screed

Minister Tua

Flight controllers

Electronic Countermeasures

Dual Turbolaser Turrets

Raider-1 Corvette

Ordnance experts

Expanded Hangar Bays

Gozanti Cruisers

Flight Commander

Bomber Command Center

Gozanti Cruisers

Suppressor

Squadrons

Major Rhymer

TIE Bomber

TIE Bomber

Maarek Stele

TIE Defender

TIE Defender

Lambda Shuttle

Zertik Strom

Tempest Squadron

2nd Plance

Alex Nobles 386/400

Imperial-2 Star Destroyer

Admiral Screed

Gunnery Team

Electronic Countermeasures

X17 Turbolasers

Relentless

Gladiator-1 Star Destroyer

Intel Officer

Ordnance Experts

Engine Techs

Assault Proton Torpedoes

Demolisher

Raider-1 Corvette

Ordnance Experts

Flechette Torpedoes

Raider-1 Corvette

Ordnance Experts

Flechette Torpedoes

Gozanti Cruisers

Comms Net

3rd Place:

Bobby Crowley 397/400

Imperial-2 Star Detroyer

Admiral Motti

Wing Commander

Gunnery Team

Quad Laser Turrets

Electronic Countermeasures

SW-7 Ion batteries

Spinal Armament

Avenger

Gladiator-1 Sar Destroyer

Minister Tua

Reinforced Blast Doors

Ordnance Experts

Medical Team

Assault Proton Torpedoes

Demolisher

Squadrons

Boba Fett

Dengar

VT-49 Decimator

VT-49 Decimator

Firespray-31

Firespray-31

4th Palce

Jeremy Larson 400/400

Imperial-2 Star Destroyer

Admiral Motti

Avenger

Wing Commander

Flight Controllers

Expanded Hangar Bays

Electronic Countermeasures

Leading Shots

X17 Turbolasers

Gozant Cruisers

Bomber Command Center

Gozanti Cruisers

Comms Net

Gozanti Cruisers

Repair Crews

Squadrons

Darth Vader

Tempest Squadron

Zertik Strom

Major Rhymer

Captain Jonus

Maarek Stele

TIE Defender

TIE Defender

I should add that comedy of comedies, something absurdly similar to what I was running at GenCon last year came in second. And I've spent the entire last few months absolutely certain that a no-squadron Imperial fleet couldn't possibly have a shot at winning. Glad to have been proven wrong!

Well I certainly learned a lot more about competitive Armada playing at the Milwaukee Regional. I went in just wanting to play three games and didn't expect to do very well, but I probably could have placed reasonably well had I been practicing my list well beforehand. My mistakes all came from a lack of practice.

First lesson learned : Always remember when I have X17 Turbolasers equipped. I constantly forgot I had this upgrade and there were key times when the opponent not redirecting more than one shield would have made the difference between a dead ship and a living one that got to shoot back.

Second lesson learned : If an enemy ship has 1 hull left and I can ram it to finish it off, even if that sticks my ship in an undesirable spot (in this case exposing it to a close-range MC80 Assault Cruiser broadside), it is always worth it to ram the ship. A ship at 1 hull is still a living ship and can shoot back. I neglected to ram an MC30 with my ISD-II to kill it and instead wanted to finish it off with my Raider on the next activation rather than put my ISD in a bad spot next to the MC80 from the maneuver the ram would cause. The MC30 shot back with both front and side arcs, stripping away what shields my ISD had left and doing some hull damage before ramming itself into the ISD for one more hull damage. Then the MC80 went on the Rebels next activation and did enough damage to guarantee the ISD would die at the start of the next round (opponent had initiative).

Highlights of the day

In the first round, watching n00bzilla99's Demolisher fly around and demolish my fleet was actually kind of cool. Nobody runs Gladiators in the local scene so I'm not used to going up against Demolisher . That thing was dodging dangerous arcs and hitting harder than an ISD. I had no chance against it. But it was pretty cool to watch it all in action.

The second round I made my most critical mistakes of the day (listed above) so I don't look back on that one fondly. I could have/should have won that one, but inexperience cost me.

The third round was actually kind of a dud match too though we still had fun and I managed to win it. Our ships came so fast at each other that the only round of shooting was round 2 and 3, and then neither of us could get turned around properly to get our capital ships back in the fight. So they just passed each other, took a few pot shots, and kept going in opposite directions. I knew that if I reengaged my opponent, I would most likely lose. So I kept my fleet flying away to minimize losses and it turned into more of a squadron battle than anything else.

Best part of the third match was using Darth Vader's ability to have my Raider reroll dice 5 times (Judge confirmed Vader's ability can be used multiple times per attack) at close range out the front arc at my opponent's GR-75 that was carrying his admiral. I needed one accuracy and at least four damage on the dice. Vader choked out so many crew members on that Raider to get that result...

I went home with my cool new CR90A alternate art card. Which is now added to my fleet for Corellian Conflict we played the next day. Got all my losses out during the Regional so I could successfully defend a Rebel Base from the Empire.

9 hours ago, Reinholt said:

Honestly, the real fix is that you need another round of play.

The FFG tournament format is great when you have 8 players, and also great at major events with 5-ish rounds and a cut. Where it really breaks down is regionals...

I like this solution. I would have happily played a 4th round, (even against Jerry again!) in order to separate the scores a bit. If he had won a 4th game (going 3-1) with a higher margin, I wouldn't even feel bad, he would have just played better.

PS: Just so all of this is clear, none of my ill-will is directed at Jerry. I really enjoyed my game against him, it was very challenging and very rewarding, and he was a great sport and very friendly. I'm just upset with the system is all.

6 hours ago, Derpzilla88 said:

Best part of the third match was using Darth Vader's ability to have my Raider reroll dice 5 times (Judge confirmed Vader's ability can be used multiple times per attack) at close range out the front arc at my opponent's GR-75 that was carrying his admiral. I needed one accuracy and at least four damage on the dice. Vader choked out so many crew members on that Raider to get that result...

Uhhh, the judge was 100% wrong. Vader's ability uses "while" for its timing. From the rulebook on page 5:

Quote

A “while” effect can be resolved during the specified event and cannot occur again during that instance of the event.

I hope that didn't completely swing the game.

On 2/12/2017 at 2:59 AM, Ginkapo said:

Do you know whats unfair. I have beaten quite a lot of regional winners, often with their winning lists.

Cant do well at our regionals.

Time to brexit to North America, Gink. Bring it on.

32 minutes ago, comatose said:

Uhhh, the judge was 100% wrong. Vader's ability uses "while" for its timing. From the rulebook on page 5:

I hope that didn't completely swing the game.

Before I tried to reroll with Vader multiple times, I called the judge over to confirm. His ruling was that Vader's card doesn't say "once per round" and because a dice can be rerolled multiple times in Armada (unlike X-Wing) it looked legitimate. But if Vader can only do it once, I'll be sure to let our local group know.

It didn't completely swing the game in my favor, but it certainly helped me ensure I wouldn't lose that round. The GR-75 holding his admiral was the only ship destroyed in that game. I did manage to wipe out all of his fighter squadrons, but took rather hefty squadron losses on my end too.

For what it's worth, I don't think me beating him affected the standings that much if at all. I still placed 20th out of 21 participants and my round 3 opponent placed higher than I did.

2 minutes ago, Derpzilla88 said:

Before I tried to reroll with Vader multiple times, I called the judge over to confirm. His ruling was that Vader's card doesn't say "once per round" and because a dice can be rerolled multiple times in Armada (unlike X-Wing) it looked legitimate. But if Vader can only do it once, I'll be sure to let our local group know.

It didn't completely swing the game in my favor, but it certainly helped me ensure I wouldn't lose that round. The GR-75 holding his admiral was the only ship destroyed in that game. I did manage to wipe out all of his fighter squadrons, but took rather hefty squadron losses on my end too.

For what it's worth, I don't think me beating him affected the standings that much if at all. I still placed 20th out of 21 participants and my round 3 opponent placed higher than I did.

It doesn't need the "once per round" because the "while" keyword has its own timing. It limits it to being usable once per attack action and therefore twice per activation if you have two attacks against ships.

Even without realizing this nuance, I'm surprised he didn't wonder, "By my logic, every ability that says while could be used an infinite number of times. Swarm is awesome because it guarantees max damage!"

Quote

Swarm: While attacking a squadron engaged with another squadron, you may reroll 1 die.

Yup, Ordnance Experts too.

On 2/11/2017 at 11:19 PM, Ophion said:

Sydney Regionals yesterday. 18 players I think - probably down a bit because it was the same day as a big Xwing tourney in Canberra.

Top 3 were all Imperials

1st was Motti, ISD2, Suppressor, Demo and 5 scatter aces

2nd was Motti, Demo, Raider, 3 Gozanti, Rhymerball

3rd was Motti (I think!?) ISD1 and rhymer ball and 3 Goz(?)

3 way tie for 1st, rankings decided by MOV/SOS.

Congrats to the winners!!

Thanks for the info! If you dig up any more, please let me know.

4 minutes ago, shmitty said:

Thanks for the info! If you dig up any more, please let me know.

Did you get the Milwaukee regionals data?