Been playing lots of 500 point games in the CC and I like the game a lot better at that point value.

Thoughts?

2 minutes ago, stayontarget said:

Been playing lots of 500 point games in the CC and I like the game a lot better at that point value.

Thoughts?

Personally I'd like that, but then really the only time you HAVE to obey that limit is in tournaments, since casual games can be any size. With that in mind, tournament games generally take a while to complete, and sometimes time runs out before the game naturally ends, so increasing the number of ships and especially squads to deal with, while still limiting the time one has to do so, seems like a bad idea. Similarly, tournaments as a whole take a while, and increasing the time of each game to accommodate additional ships and squads (and hence play time) means increasing the length of the tournament. If it already lasts 6 or more hours, I really don't see that as feasible, let alone recommendable.

No, I really don't think the game works at that level as well. With that many more squadrons on the board, the games can really slow down exponentionally. Also, with still only 6 Rounds, having more squadrons on the board can affect the overall effectiveness of squadrons in general. You also lose some interesting list-building trade-offs.

In a lot of games, less is sometimes more. And I think that's true in Armada too.

Tournament play? No. CC and house rules for bigger battles? Go for it.

I don't think FFG will change it. But I don't think it would be the worst thing. Our CC games didn't really last any longer than our regular games we found. The activations stayed similar to what they are now, it was just with non-flotilla ships.

Urgh. Some of our CC Games have become very long indeed at 500 points.

As big a proponent as i am of large fleet battles, for tournaments i doubt very much they'll increase to 500 points. I love big fleet battles, but i'll be the first to admit they burn up a LOT of time.

I prefer the variance at 500 but the design really killed the game with squadron management complexity.

We played a CC game with 2 500 pt fleets close to max squads, with almost every squad keyword, and it was extremely taxing and took far too long to play. They made squads waaaaay too cumbersome in this game.

I feel the squad 1/3 limit does not work well at 500 pts (is too much) and the length on games increase is not desirable.

I'd be okay with it--in general I've been enjoying the 500-point CC games--but I don't think it's likely.

It does change the game in some pretty significant ways, though:

Squadron alpha strikes on ships get waaay more dangerous, particularly during the squadron phase before fleet engagement.

The advantage of initiative is mitigated as the one ship you activate first counts for a smaller total percentage of your fleet's total power.

Area and fleet-wide effects become more powerful as affect more stuff.

Expensive admirals scale faster than cheaper ones generally speaking, giving dudes like Ackbar and Tarkin a boost.

"Taxes" become less onerous as they represent a smaller total percentage of your fleet (admiral tax, Interdictor/Pelta, having to put the Home One title on that awful platform, etc).

The only way this would work if is they limited squadrons to 133 or less. The game gets bogged down with tons of squadrons on both sides as it is and no game would ever finish in time in a tournament with max squads on both sides.

1 hour ago, Overdawg said:

The only way this would work if is they limited squadrons to 133 or less. The game gets bogged down with tons of squadrons on both sides as it is and no game would ever finish in time in a tournament with max squads on both sides.

This is my biggest apprehension about increasing the fleet values again.

I thought 500pts gives a 33pt increase to squadron cap? that is 1 (unique)-3 (generic)more squadrons, hardly game breaking amounts.

What 500 points does allow is a no squadron build, than can table someone who spent a full 164pts on squadrons, very quickly.

I suppose I'm one of the very few people who actually prefer the game at lower point values. I think 300 is lots, and I really like playing 250 on 3x3 boards. It introduces it's own set of problems but we can get a few games in that way and experiment with fun fleet or ship builds without spending too much time.

4 hours ago, Drasnighta said:

Urgh. Some of our CC Games have become very long indeed at 500 points.

What happened? Do you want to talk about it? Been looking for some table-test experience analysis.

Just now, Blail Blerg said:

What happened? Do you want to talk about it? Been looking for some table-test experience analysis.

Most of us here in Calgary are pretty well used to throwing Squadrons about... Most of the time we're up there in Squadrons on both sides...

But Squadrons - at least for us - are quick and easy... Its the Maneuver Analysis Paralysis of Additional ships, and the Impetus behind every move being important because if I lose this ship it might be gone for good...... Its Pre-measure with Range Ruler... Its Get the Maneuver Tool. Click, click, hover, click click click, hover. Think. Hover. Re-measure with range ruler.. Try to guess end position, measure with range ruler there... Click click... MAYBE lock in Maneuver there, or sigh heavily and then repeat the whole process....


of course, its Hyper-obvious for me, because I have taken the "I'm Tarkin and I have 1 Large and 3 Medium Ships... WOOOOO!" Approach to my games and just don't care... But a lot of the time, I'm still finishing up last...

And I willingly admit that, my statements re: Squadrons are Ships are generally considered opposite to what a lot of other people say - with Squadrons bogging things down for them...

I would not disagree with maneuver tool thinking being a common slow factor. I've found this too. Although I find it a lot more interesting than the kind of go-almost-where-ever type of movement of squadrons. Once you get the hang of what your squadron interactions are and how the range bubbles work there, it tends to go faster, but it also just ends up being mostly the same.

Which is why I think ship movement, with the clicks and avoiding rocks, and still trying to get double arcs and avoid fire to be much more skill intensive.

Squadrons tend to get bogged down also when trying to figure out the optimal order of activation is.

--

More what I'm trying to find is, what happens when you add that 100 points, it seems time scales multiplicatively with points, not linearly. 200 pts usually takes 30-45 mins (much less than 50% of the time) , 400pts 1.5-2hrs avg, and 500 points seems to be dragging out to 3-3+ hours, even though its only a 25% increase compared to 400.

--

1 hour ago, TheEasternKing said:

I thought 500pts gives a 33pt increase to squadron cap? that is 1 (unique)-3 (generic)more squadrons, hardly game breaking amounts.

What 500 points does allow is a no squadron build, than can table someone who spent a full 164pts on squadrons, very quickly.

Squadrons scale nearly multiplicatively also. Making those extra 33 a lot a lot more powerful. Its like taking 10 squadrons of rebel bombers/Bwings with aces now then adding 4 Zs on top of that. Its a lot because things that affect squadrons do so across the board.

I have not seen how 500 no squadrons is more capable of tabling. I want to see the evidence. Do you have some to show?

At 400pts, 134 squads vs 7 MSU is an attrition game. Neither is really having a good time getting an easy win.

Maybe squadrons could be rounded up and limited to 150pts? Everything beyond that goes on ships and upgrades for matches hitting 500pts and up.

1 minute ago, DarthAmmon said:

Maybe squadrons could be rounded up and limited to 150pts? Everything beyond that goes on ships and upgrades for matches hitting 500pts and up.

I would like this, but the current rule is just always 1/3 of the list points rounded up. And honestly. If you really wanna spam 14 fighters in 500 points and be totally competitive, I think you should be allowed to.

The sad part is a very vocal part of the forum here thinks that if you want to run 2 large ships or few or no squadrons should you be allowed to and be competitive.

3 hours ago, TheEasternKing said:

What 500 points does allow is a no squadron build, than can table someone who spent a full 164pts on squadrons, very quickly.

You see, you would think that, but this is not how I've seen it play out.

What I've seen instead is that the squadrons reach that critical mass where they can take down a hard ship target on turn 2. I've seen it happen to both Mothmonition and an ISD, generally two of the hardest targets for squadrons. At 400, they're close but you can usually get through with reasonable luck. At 500, they have fair odds of popping it. Losing a heavy hitter that fast means the squadronless fleet is already bleeding striking power before they're able to engage the carriers and start tearing down squadron activations, which is always the sign that the game is heading south for the squadronless fleet.

I'm not saying I've exhausted every option at 500 or anything, so if you have counterexamples I'm happy to be shown wrong on this. But I do have a pretty good squadronless solution at 400 and several games' evidence that that specific solution, at least, doesn't scale well to 500.

Another idea for casual games at least: 400pt fleets, but players get to pick a free large base ship, which acts as the capital ship for the fleet. :-)

13 minutes ago, Ardaedhel said:

You see, you would think that, but this is not how I've seen it play out.

What I've seen instead is that the squadrons reach that critical mass where they can take down a hard ship target on turn 2. I've seen it happen to both Mothmonition and an ISD, generally two of the hardest targets for squadrons. At 400, they're close but you can usually get through with reasonable luck. At 500, they have fair odds of popping it. Losing a heavy hitter that fast means the squadronless fleet is already bleeding striking power before they're able to engage the carriers and start tearing down squadron activations, which is always the sign that the game is heading south for the squadronless fleet.

I'm not saying I've exhausted every option at 500 or anything, so if you have counterexamples I'm happy to be shown wrong on this. But I do have a pretty good squadronless solution at 400 and several games' evidence that that specific solution, at least, doesn't scale well to 500.

See. This is what I've been saying too.

2 minutes ago, DarthAmmon said:

Another idea for casual games at least: 400pt fleets, but players get to pick a free large base ship, which acts as the capital ship for the fleet. :-)

Now, I like that idea!

I came up with that while thinking up an alternate way of playing CC. lol

45 minutes ago, Ardaedhel said:

You see, you would think that, but this is not how I've seen it play out.

What I've seen instead is that the squadrons reach that critical mass where they can take down a hard ship target on turn 2. I've seen it happen to both Mothmonition and an ISD, generally two of the hardest targets for squadrons. At 400, they're close but you can usually get through with reasonable luck. At 500, they have fair odds of popping it. Losing a heavy hitter that fast means the squadronless fleet is already bleeding striking power before they're able to engage the carriers and start tearing down squadron activations, which is always the sign that the game is heading south for the squadronless fleet.

I'm not saying I've exhausted every option at 500 or anything, so if you have counterexamples I'm happy to be shown wrong on this. But I do have a pretty good squadronless solution at 400 and several games' evidence that that specific solution, at least, doesn't scale well to 500.

I'd probably try something along the lines of :

ISD II : Vet Gunners : OLP : XX9 : Avenger

Glad I : Int Off : OE : APT : ET : Demolisher

Raider I : OE : Flechette Torps

Raider I : OE : Flechette Torps

Gozanti Cruiser : Admiral Screed

Gozanti Cruiser x2 : Slicer Tools

Gozanti Cruiser X2

490pts, and I just threw this together, so it could be finessed some. 9 Activations, a way of negating squadrons, and enough activations to get your last / first combos in as needed.

I have only played a few games at 500pts, and a few at 600pts, overall not enough for me to say one way or another whether it ends up breaking game balance.