The only thing you have to do to Demo is not allow the attack after engine techs. It still means you can launch the attack from outside of red range but you are going to have to earn it because the attack window is way smaller. It'll reward good movement and planning the turn before. It also gives a bit more ability to counter which is always good for game play and Demo would still be an awesome title for 10 points.

I would suggest the OP should modify their post to provide some context, as this sort of discussion in vacuum and without a framework always produces a random and disconnected grab bag of responses, most of which would make the game worse because people aren't considering the 2nd order effects.

For example, for all those complaining that the only gladiator you see is Demolisher (or the only Nebulon B you see is Yavaris) and wanting to nerf those things on a stand-alone basis, you realize this will make things worse, yes? You won't start seeing non-demo glads or non-Yavaris Nebulons. You simply will not see the ship at all, because if it were good on a stand-alone basis it would already be being played. Nerfing the titles without addressing core issues that prevent people from wanting to take the ship without the title just means we settle in on one dominant imperial and rebel list with no diversity.

If we really want to consider this topic, I would start with the following questions:

1: What upgrades or ships disproportionately appear in winning fleets or top-4 fleets in Shmitty's regionals data? As in, what outperforms noticeably when it shows up?

2: What stuff is never taken, or never shows up in the top-4? If nobody or almost nobody is using something in a field, that thing is probably bad and could use some thought.

One thing I'd also like to state with any type of Yavaris vs Demolisher debate. The Demolisher pretty much makes the single thing the gladiator does that much better. The Yavaris amplifies one part of what the Nebulon B can do (carrier, maybe to an absurd level) but doesn't affect other things the Nebulon can do. For me that's an important difference. You're bringing the gladiator to do one thing, and the demolisher overcharges what you're bringing the gladiator for every time. You can bring the Nebulon for many things outside of the Yavaris route.

5 hours ago, TheCallum said:

Firstly, thats my point, you don't (very rarely) see Glads without Demo, and you don't (very rarely) see multi Glad lists.

Secondly, you may prefer the Arquitens to the Glad, but they are such drastically different ships that both have a role to play.

using the same logic, do you often see Neb-Bs without Salvation or Yavaris? In both cases, it's the titles that make the ships worthwhile.

Defending my lovely Nebulons here. It's not just Yavaris that gets played. Sato loves a Salvation Support Frigate with Spinal Armaments.

FFG brings out the nerf bat when a particular build or strategy is dominating the top tables in tournaments.

Here are things showing up in more than 50% of the fleets in the Top 4 for the Wave 5 Regionals:

• Admiral Motti - 54% of Imperial Fleets
• Flotillas - 90% of all fleets
• TRCs - 57% of Rebel Fleets
• Demolisher - 58% of Imperial Fleets
• Gladiator - 58% of Imperial Fleets
• ISDs - 75% of Imperial Fleets

And that's pretty much it.

FFG also does not use point adjustments to fix things. They also rarely boost up poor cards directly.

The only things that stand out are TRCs and Demo. I don't think anyone believes we should nerf ISDs. Flotillas are common for being cheap activations. BCCs were not particularly dominate.

From looking at all the regionals fleets, I think the Imperials fared slightly worse this time around as fewer people took multiple GSDs. There is an incorrect assumption that the GSD is bad without Demolisher. Demo is awesome, but the GSD is really solid and can do most everything an MC-30 can do for less. Fleets with multiple GSDs did really well in Regionals, just very few folks took them.

Yavaris did well and accounted for over about 75% of the Nebs taken, but was not dominating the top tables.

2 hours ago, Undeadguy said:

Why so much Demo hate? I can't pull up the huge spreadsheet, but I didn't think it was winning anymore than MC80s or Yavaris (I haven't heard of any big wins with Demo either). If anything, Yavaris can use a nerf so her ability can only be used on squads at close-medium range. Either that or FCT needs to cost more than 3 points.

Here are some other buffs/nerfs I can think of:

Dominator/Redemption - make it cheaper. 12/8 points is very steep for sub-par ships.
Tie/F - 7 points - with all the new squad play, Tie/F die even quicker than before. And now Tie/D and AFFM/FCT means you can't hide and wait to use them because they either die or you get bombed.
PDR - 3 points - reroll any dice while attacking squads
Redundant Shields - 5/6 points and drop modification
TRC - make it a modification and 8 points

eh, I don't think Yavaris needs a nerf that much. The "if it does not move" is a big restriction enough IMO.

3 minutes ago, Sybreed said:

eh, I don't think Yavaris needs a nerf that much. The "if it does not move" is a big restriction enough IMO.

It prevents Relay double tapping. Sure, you have to invest 30 points, but those VCXs can also toss 6 blues when activated and they have 8 hull.

Just now, Undeadguy said:

It prevents Relay double tapping. Sure, you have to invest 30 points, but those VCXs can also toss 6 blues when activated and they have 8 hull.

hmmm I think FFG gave VCX relay just for that reason alone. And 30 points is a pretty huge investment for a gimmick that might not work. Personally I haven'T seen anyone use it effectively.

Demo is fine, Yavaris is fine, we're all fine here...

How are you?

Again with the Demo hate? Even with ALL the tools FFG has given you to deal with it? DCO, Blast Doors, Tagge, Targeting Scramblers, G8, Slicer Tools, ALLLLLL the squadrons we are drowning in! You may as well just ask for a card that reads "at the begininning of the game, destroy all enemy ships as I clearly don't want to play a tough game"

I mean really, you want to take the single most viable title that the Imperials have and remove it from the game? You just want to see Rebel vs Rebel matches from now on? Because that IS what will happen if you take away their only power pieces while also allowing the rebels to keep all their goodies (which, imo, have made them MUCH stronger than imps over the last few waves)

Yet another Boring Conversation.

X-Wing:

10 Waves,
at least 5 Major Card Erratas,
and numerous Minor Ones. (I don't count adding a Unique dot as Major, but changing the actual text of the card is, for example).
Additionally, Ships re-issed with "Fixing" Text to make them competitive again. (Specific to the Ships involved)

Armada:

5 Waves,
2 Card Erratas (In both Cases, 1-2 words were added/modified). (Jamming Field + Most Wanted)
1 "Pseudo-Fixing" Card, who happens to be an Admiral, who happens to do more than just fix the one Ship.

So, we're still doing better overall, to be honest. And I hope it continues to progress in this manner.

4 minutes ago, Drasnighta said:

Yet another Boring Conversation.

X-Wing:

10 Waves,
at least 5 Major Card Erratas,
and numerous Minor Ones. (I don't count adding a Unique dot as Major, but changing the actual text of the card is, for example).
Additionally, Ships re-issed with "Fixing" Text to make them competitive again. (Specific to the Ships involved)

Armada:

5 Waves,
2 Card Erratas (In both Cases, 1-2 words were added/modified). (Jamming Field + Most Wanted)
1 "Pseudo-Fixing" Card, who happens to be an Admiral, who happens to do more than just fix the one Ship.

So, we're still doing better overall, to be honest. And I hope it continues to progress in this manner.

and Dras getting all angsty again because not everyone thinks Armada is perfect :rollseyes:

Some stuff could get improved. I'm against nerfs personally, I'd rather see buffs thrown around for the cards that need it the most. But to say nothing needs a change is being a bit blind to the fact that some cards are just not good and not played.

One change I'd like to see? Tactical experts give the concentrate fire command the possibility to act as a token as well.

A couple thoughts as I peruse this thread;

1. Demo is fine. Its not nearly the force it once was. Still good, still very strong, but given the ship once loaded out generally runs close to 100 points I think its fine given its fragility and the mulititude of ways it can be handled. Also, as muliple people have pointed out, the glad isn't a bad ship. At all.

2. Yavaris is also fine. To make Yavaris really sing you are investing in mulitiple upgrades across multiple ships plus the squadrons themselves. There are a number of moving parts involved, and that risk/reward cost doesn't show up in the math but does show up when you see the range of finishes in the regionals data.

3. Would love to see more upgrades that make for effective ship AS platforms. If that means changing old cards like PDR or adding new ones then great.

4. I really appreciate the commitment to the thought exercise it takes to even imagine they would nerf Norra less than 3 months after playtesting and releasing her.

5. Despite my stated stance on BCC being perfectly fine, I actually have no strong feelings about their stacking being changed. I think it may be a design space issue down the road.

6. At this point in the game's lifespan, I don't see Rhymer as an issue, simply a useful option in the Imperial toolbox.

7. Would love to see Targetting Beacons get reworded to be a more competetive option.

I kind of want to see them not count Flotillas as ships for tabling purposes.

Just now, ImpStarDeuces said:

I kind of want to see them not count Flotillas as ships for tabling purposes.

Hm. Thats pretty interesting. I need to think about that.

Nice outside the box idea either way.

4 minutes ago, ImpStarDeuces said:

I kind of want to see them not count Flotillas as ships for tabling purposes.

No. Just because you (and others) do not want to dedicate resources to blow up flotillas does not mean you get to table me by blowing up 2 of my 5 ships, ESPECIALLY since those three can still wreak havoc by pushing squads to take out your squads/ships. I made the investment in points, it is up to YOU to figure out how to destroy it, not cry it off the table.

Our last regional, pre wave 5, was win by 2x victory 3x gozanti, bomber/screen mix.

The game is fine, move along.

@Green Knight you opened the Pandora's Box!!

4 minutes ago, ImpStarDeuces said:

I kind of want to see them not count Flotillas as ships for tabling purposes.

But if you are at the point where you would table your opponent and they have 1-2 flotillas left, chances are you destroyed the majority of their fleet. The only time this would not be true is if they are playing a bomber force, which means the 3 flotillas they have are contributing to the fleet, whether it be BCC, activating squads or using AA.

I'm not directly opposed to it, but I don't think it would be fair to the people that play 1-2 ships and 2-3 flotillas that are meant to push squads. Like the Pelta, Yavaris, 3 GR-75 list. You just have to kill the Pelta and Neb to win, despite investing heavily into the GR-75s with upgrades.

If you said they had to be naked in order to table, 2 points gets you a Comms Net, which is very beneficial. If you put a point restriction, like 5 points and under to be considered tabled, you just negated the purpose of a Comms Net, but if you go to 1 point, it's the same thing as saying naked flotillas are considered to be tabled like squads.

I don't know how FFG could implement this without screwing up the game.

2 minutes ago, Sybreed said:

and Dras getting all angsty again because not everyone thinks Armada is perfect :rollseyes:

"Boring conversation Anyway" was in response to Madaghmire.

But, to respond to you...

Armada isn't Perfect.

::shock-horror!::

There's a few small, but very hefty things I'd change, right now if I could in the mail rules, which would delete half of the FAQs required...

But I'm also very aware of what it takes to actually get a conversation going with FFG in these matters... Because I've been down that road multiple times, and honestly? Its not worth it. It really isn't. In the end, it just ends up being disappointing. These things are designed with super-long lead times. Plus they're designed in group, and tested, and then take forever to actually come through and see the light of day in any way, shape or form... Its impossible to influence anything in the immediate action. Even if we had a situation come up where we needed to change something because it was horridly broken, it would take 18 months for any design responses to occur.

Plus would have to be dealing with 1-2 additional releases in that meantime, which may also be influenced by or be influencing the thing in question - giving us a situation where a problem has already been solved - we just don't know it yet. .

Too many of us, at one time or another, deign to have "The Solution" to a problem - I know I've been guilty of thinking of that in the past, and honestly - I'm going ot be a little guilty of it right now... Because my solution is to shut up on these matters now. Because there isn't anything to do about it. We can ***** and whine and complain all we want on these forums - and even if we make a big deal about how we believe the designers take heed of what happens here (which is questionable enough), the actual time to effect change is so long, that our memories won't even remember what the hell we were bitching about by the time we get there...

So, yes. I get angsty. I get offended. I get annoyed. I'm allowed to be. I'm not stifling your creativity or forcing you to take your ideas elsewhere. by all means, have your ideas, present your ideas... But be aware of the Grim Reality that is involved... That putting an Idea up is a great way for it not to be enacted, because FFG can and will vet ideas that they can present as their own and not derived from someone else - this is why they do not accept unsolicited games design things through their feedback forms - if they utilise something you suggest, you have argument to own it, and not them, which pushes some questionable legalities.

So much so, that they just won't do it.

Which is why I get annoyed. Because quite often, people have good ideas ... And its a shame now, that because of the way they are pushed or measured on the forums, those ideas will never see the light of day in that format .......... Its disappointing. Oftentimes, its heartbreaking .

A good while ago, I spent a good week exchanging Emails with a certain (in)famous employee. It gave me an insight into things in FFG, how they operate behind the scenes, and although I'm not at liberty to discuss a lot of what went by in that exchange - it (at the time) strengthened my invovlement in the Rules Sub-Forum, and simultaneously, had me draw back from everywhere else.... (Of course, there's no Simultaneous in Armada, so I chose to enact the Pullback first, and then step up in the Rules Sub-Forum, as the timing was the same) ...

In the end, its the best for me, and its the best for Armada . The Armada that I love and enjoy so much, that despite having some of the worst dice-luck in the world, I keep playing. That despite receiving regular abusive messages and emails, I continue to have my say, and offer advice... Do I wish I had some more respect in some ways? Sure, I'd love for my opinion to mean more to some people (and I thank those who do consider my opinion, at least somewhat) - but in the end, its just a pseudo-anonymous voice on the Internet. And one that, despite the fact its unemployed and would do so in an instant, is barred from ever working for FFG...

I caught it dras!

Somehow, in one thread, we have a rehash of most of our top arguments.

"Demolisher is OP plz nerf!"

"Yavaris is OP plz nerf!"

"Flotillas are OP plz nerf!"

"Lifeboats are OP plz nerf!"

"Squadrons are OP plz nerf!"

Can someone complain about Clonisher next?

Maybe after that we can complain about how raiders are bad?

And then complain that raiders are OP plz nerf?

3 minutes ago, Eggzavier said:

Somehow, in one thread, we have a rehash of most of our top arguments.

"Demolisher is OP plz nerf!"

"Yavaris is OP plz nerf!"

"Flotillas are OP plz nerf!"

"Squadrons are OP plz nerf!"

Can someone complain about Clonisher next?

Maybe after that we can complain about how raiders are bad?

And then complain that raiders are OP plz nerf?

Everything is OP when I can't win 100% of the time.

Plz nerf the good players so I can win.

Just now, Undeadguy said:

Everything is OP when I can't win 100% of the time.

Plz nerf the good players so I can win.

Or at least "nerf the powerful, efficiently costed things so that my janky uncompetitive build can win the glory it oh so deserves."

Git gud.

In all seriousness though, I think the game is at the best level of balance it ever has been at.

Is it perfect? Nah, but it's a lot of fun.