This is something that I've been wondering recently. People have been asking for a way to delay your activation or "pass your turn" so your big ship fleet is not at a too big disadvantage vs a MSU fleet, something I've been in favor of myself as I believe it allows people to build "quality" fleets.

As most people know, Imperial Assault introduced a "pass your turn" mechanic to help balance the game. I don't know the details because I don't own IA, but apparently this was a major cause of imbalance that needed an errata to be fixed.

My interrogation is this: Is it possible that, considering FFG do erratas only as a last resort, made flotillas what they are as to accomplish the same goal as passing your turn in, perhaps, a more "elegant" way?

Do people who ask for a way to pass your turn should simply look at flotillas instead?

I'm still advocating that a way to pass your turn could help balance quality lists vs quantity lists, as dumping points into "pass units" is kind of counter-intuitive when you want a quality list. And also, there's a sort of domino effect when you start losing ships in Armada, as losing activations is just as bad as losing the ship itself.

Even some videogames used similar mechanics (or with a similar endgoal). The Banner Saga, for example, uses a system where when you or your enemy has less units, it has the right to activate his units more often until both players has en equal number of units again.

I think it's probably worth taking a step back and looking at what the actual problem is that is caused by the activation imbalance, as doing so may point out another solution that could work better than simply spacing out activations more.

To whit: I believe it would be fair to say that the issue is...difference in activation counts means the player with more activations is better able to react to, and get firing opportunities, against the player with fewer activations. Which is a similar issue that hex-and-counter wargames have faced since the 1970s. And the easiest solution is probably the same one that 'Panzer Leader' implemented as the sequel to 'Panzer Blitz' - opportunity fire!

IE., have a new rule that runs something like:

"If a ship or squadron has not performed any attack during the turn, it may execute one attack against an enemy ship or squadron that attacks it, after that attack is complete"

(...this being, for squadrons, very similar to 'counter', except... 1: It is only once-a-turn instead of every-time, 2: It requires the squadron not have already activated or otherwise attacked, and 3: It doesn't work if the target of the attack is destroyed. And for ships, of course, a new way to respond to being stuck activating before any enemy is in range, and moving into range of their guns before their turn to fire.)

Flotillas is for me more than just a "pass your turn" ship activation.

I love having at least 1x GR75 with Coms Net and Boosted coms for 24pts. why?

Its a cheap carrier that frees up valuable command dials on the bigger ships, to commands that enables them to concentrate more on flying and repairing, rather being tied up in the extra workload of bossing sqds around.

And when that big valuble ship needs an extra critical command token, for the same or a later turn, who will help? That little flotilla at distance 1-5.

The Flotilla is a superb little support ship with a capital S, that helps you to execise better command and control of your other ships and sqds.

So being a "pass your turn" ship activation is just one of its many roles and people will proberly point out other support jobs it can do, than the one I just outlined

I suppose it's possible, but I think it's also equally possible that they added not only as a cheap activation, but as a possible 'blocker' for the then popular Demolisher fleets. I think the combination of cheap activations and cheap movement blocking led to the downfall of that fleet archetype so it clearly would be in line with their trend of releasing 'counters' to perceived imbalances.

To me, another way they could have 'solved' that issue and also softened some of the activation advantage would have been to simply add a rules amendment that for the first player, the last ship activated cannot be your first ship activated unless you have only one left.

But they chose the 'counter' system and added tools people can use instead. It all works in the end

In addition, Flotillas provided cheap activations and support for squadron play, again leading to a shift away from Rogues and to more 'standard' squadrons (which were lacking).

Yes.

And they worked fantastically.

PREFACE: This is merely a solution to a perceived problem, this does not mean that more activations always wins. Tournaments with three rounds are much more likely to be determined by matchup than anything else(different issue). Moral of the story, play the meta. If something seems to be really good, play it and see how you lose to learn how to beat it. Some players are just good enough that they can generate a random fleet and still win.

THE IDEA: The real issue is that in the current rules, activating one ship is the same as activating any other. If you take the extreme, a triple ISD list vs a CR90 swarm, you actually arrive at around the same command value. The solution then, imo, is to base the ability to pass on the command value of the ships activated thus far. When it is your turn, if your opponent has not activated more command value than you, you may pass.

If the CR90 player is first:

1. Rebels activate a CR90 (1,0)
2. Imperials activate an ISD (1,3)
3. Rebels activate a CR90 (2,3)
4. Imperials pass (2,3)
5. Rebels activate a CR90(3,3)
6. Imperials pass(3,3)
7. Rebels activate a CR90(4,3)
8. Imperials activate ISD(4,6)
9. ...

In theory, this should result in a relatively even split. I had a graph a while ago that charted the activation cost by faction. Some ships would become incredible deals (AFM2), while others would be a detriment(Interdictor). A system like this would also make a more granular system for manipulation by future cards. That being said, the odds of this large of a rule shift is highly unlikely. FFG (and most physical product companies), will try to fix issues by shifting balance around, and thereby boosting sales of new products. So, if high activation lists continue to do well in the worldwide meta, expect cards to be coming that will counter.

No. The low cost of the flotilla has allowed for activation advantage or "passing". I think flotillas were designed to add another fleet icon and to diversify fleets more. It just so happens that having 3 flotillas and 2 heavy hitters works very well.

I don't think Armada needs a rule change to add a "pass" mechanic. When you start to lose ships, you should be punished. Armada is a very unforgiving game when you have 2 equally skilled players going at it. Honestly, the only time I ever catch a break in my play group is when I forget to do something and I ask if I can go back for the missed opportunity.

Adding a pass mechanic would mean Admo, Demo, Defiance and Devastator could and would always double/triple tap you. "Oh, you killed both my flotillas and you still have 3 more? Well I'm going to pass until you have to move that Vic into my close range double arc. And you can't kill Admo cuz Mothma and Lando, but I get to activate, shoot, and activate first next round, kill you and run away."

With the current game state, would a pass mechanic revert the game back to wave 2 where you had 2 ship lists? Why would I use flotillas?

I think FFG missed the opportunity to implement this when the game was released. Think about the bad wave 0/1 titles we have that no one uses because they are under powered and over cost. Adding a pass mechanic would be similar to that, where the "older" content would be under powered and over cost because you no longer need to run those ships.

Also, it's hard to say if this is actually a problem. Everyone uses flotillas (isn't it over 80%?). So if everyone uses the "OP strat", is it still a problem?

You could solve the activation imbalance by separating movement and shooting into two phases. And then give every ship reiken powers. Big ships take time to explode!

1 minute ago, FourDogsInaHorseSuit said:

You could solve the activation imbalance by separating movement and shooting into two phases. And then give every ship reiken powers. Big ships take time to explode!

oh God, no

16 minutes ago, Undeadguy said:

Also, it's hard to say if this is actually a problem. Everyone uses flotillas (isn't it over 80%?). So if everyone uses the "OP strat", is it still a problem?

Agreed, I don't really see flotillas as an OP strat, exactly. I think they were intentionally designed to be available to basically every list, in part to deal with the major imbalance of significant activation advantage.

Now pretty much every fleet has the option to sacrifice an arbitrary, relatively small amount of its absolute throughput to gain activations in the form of more flotillas. Pair that with the fact that there is a fleet support upgrade that works with virtually every archetype out there, and I think there's a very strong indication that flotillas were always intended to be, if not in every fleet, at least a viable option for pretty much every fleet.

6 minutes ago, FourDogsInaHorseSuit said:

You could solve the activation imbalance by separating movement and shooting into two phases. And then give every ship reiken powers. Big ships take time to explode!

nooooooooooooo.

The only reason I play this game is because of the move then shoot mechanic being so good for gameplay.

3 minutes ago, Ardaedhel said:

Agreed, I don't really see flotillas as an OP strat, exactly. I think they were intentionally designed to be available to basically every list, in part to deal with the major imbalance of significant activation advantage.

Now pretty much every fleet has the option to sacrifice an arbitrary, relatively small amount of its absolute throughput to gain activations in the form of more flotillas. Pair that with the fact that there is a fleet support upgrade that works with virtually every archetype out there, and I think there's a very strong indication that flotillas were always intended to be, if not in every fleet, at least a viable option for pretty much every fleet.

that's a very interesting point.

I think move-then-shoot is the reason this game requires foresight: you have to predict at least a turn out where you need to be to get your shots next turn. I don't mean this to be a harsh admonition, but I really wouldn't want to see that go away. There's a reason that the only ship that can ignore that rule has been such a dominator in tournament games.

I'm really fishing for a Yavaris pun here, but I've got nothing.

9 minutes ago, Ginkapo said:

nooooooooooooo.

The only reason I play this game is because of the move then shoot mechanic being so good for gameplay.

You're kidding me, right? It's the worst part of them game. It puts so much emphasis on going first that it has to be balanced by even nuttier objectives.

1 minute ago, FourDogsInaHorseSuit said:

You're kidding me, right? It's the worst part of them game. It puts so much emphasis on going first that it has to be balanced by even nuttier objectives.

I think it makes Armada stand apart from other games. Love love love love it.

If I were going to see a "pass" mechanism implemented, I'd want to either see it as an upgrade, (tap this card instead of activating a ship) or make a rule that three "pass" in a row without an activation immediately ends the turn. Three, IMO, is the magic number.

1. I pass, because I'm waiting for the other guy to move into my trap, or move away from a spot that he is threatening, in to gain some other advantage.
2. Other guy is unwilling to allow me that advantage, so he passes.
3. Now it's right back where we were at step 1. I can either advance the game, or I can pass, ending the turn. (or possibly just the ship phase)

This effectively allows both players to agree to end the turn, but also allows a player to either allow his opponent a pass, or forbid it, based on his own interpretation of the tactical situation.

I'm not sure allowing players to pass is a good idea, but this seems the safest way to do it.

4 minutes ago, FourDogsInaHorseSuit said:

You're kidding me, right? It's the worst part of them game. It puts so much emphasis on going first that it has to be balanced by even nuttier objectives.

And you know what? Going last is almost as good.

Its when you have both the problems occur.

13 minutes ago, Ardaedhel said:

Agreed, I don't really see flotillas as an OP strat, exactly. I think they were intentionally designed to be available to basically every list, in part to deal with the major imbalance of significant activation advantage.

Now pretty much every fleet has the option to sacrifice an arbitrary, relatively small amount of its absolute throughput to gain activations in the form of more flotillas. Pair that with the fact that there is a fleet support upgrade that works with virtually every archetype out there, and I think there's a very strong indication that flotillas were always intended to be, if not in every fleet, at least a viable option for pretty much every fleet.

FFG wave 3 article seems to point towards that as well:

Treated like standard ships—with a couple of notable exceptions—flotillas come with a host of inexpensive, highly tactical abilities that allow you to coordinate your fleet more closely than ever!

Flotillas, however, do more than merely introduce a new type of ship; they also introduce a new fleet support role that you can incorporate into your fleet and games. Both of the flotillas in Wave III feature the Fleet Support upgrade icon. These upgrades are remarkable in Armada because they do less to improve the ship that bears them than they do to boost the rest of your fleet. Bolster your squadrons, repair your ships, or improve your larger ships' ability to respond to immediate threats—Fleet Support upgrades ensure that your flotillas can play a useful role in any attack plan.

https://www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/news/2016/3/16/bigger-battles-better-tactics/

It would appear FFG wanted them to be a cheap addition to every fleet. Did they predict activation being important? Maybe. But what if FFG is directly pushing us towards that?

3 minutes ago, JgzMan said:

If I were going to see a "pass" mechanism implemented, I'd want to either see it as an upgrade, (tap this card instead of activating a ship) or make a rule that three "pass" in a row without an activation immediately ends the turn. Three, IMO, is the magic number.

1. I pass, because I'm waiting for the other guy to move into my trap, or move away from a spot that he is threatening, in to gain some other advantage.
2. Other guy is unwilling to allow me that advantage, so he passes.
3. Now it's right back where we were at step 1. I can either advance the game, or I can pass, ending the turn. (or possibly just the ship phase)

This effectively allows both players to agree to end the turn, but also allows a player to either allow his opponent a pass, or forbid it, based on his own interpretation of the tactical situation.

I'm not sure allowing players to pass is a good idea, but this seems the safest way to do it.

This could be an issue as well. Even if it costs 10 points, what slot would it go in? If an officer, you could take a GR-75 for 18 points, and add this 10 point one for 28 points for a "double activation" delay. Do this twice and you have 4 delays for 56 points.

I don't think there is a good way to implement this into Armada. I don't play IA, so I don't know how it can translate into Armada.

Out of all the "fixes" I've seen to this topic, really only the pass mechanic seemed to be the easiest to implement. In fact, using errata or simply changing the tournament rules, could be an easy way to remove the mechanic after a future wave or two fixes the initial problem.

IMHO a pass function should only be an upgrade card that you have to discard in order to function.

This way its something you have to use at the right moment.

And it will only be possible to be used more than once in a game, if you sink the same card into more than one ship in your fleet.

And to avoid abuse, the upgrade slot it goes into, has to be one that will be heavily contested by other upgrade cards of equel or better purpose.

Say Officer or Weapons team slot.

Thats my three credits

Passing

2 hours ago, JgzMan said:

I pass, because I'm waiting for the other guy to move into my trap, or move away from a spot that he is threatening, in to gain some other advantage.

1. Other guy is unwilling to allow me that advantage, so he passes.
2. Now it's right back where we were at step 1. I can either advance the game, or I can pass, ending the turn. (or possibly just the ship phase)

This effectively allows both players to agree to end the turn, but also allows a player to either allow his opponent a pass, or forbid it, based on his own interpretation of the tactical situation.

The issue here is that you end up with stationary ships, if you reach the three pass limit, and that breaks something that Armada does well, the idea of velocity, and that huge ships cannot stop (or even turn) on a dime.

I wonder if it would work to have a rule like this:

"During the Ship Phase, if the other player has more ships than you and at least 2 ships left to activate, you may choose to pass your activation, if you do, you must activate a ship, if able, at your next opportunity."

This would give a slight advantage to whoever has fewer ships, especially in later turns if one player manages to destroy several of their opponent's ships, giving them an opportunity to come back after losing say an important ship.

I like flotillas, even the lifeboat ones, and think they do all their jobs magnificently - including delaying activations.

The only thing that has stopped me buying more than 2 packs per side is the thought that there will be more variety in future.

5 hours ago, Ardaedhel said:

Yes.

And they worked fantastically.

disagree as usual

the development time of each wave means that these were in dev way before.