Just thought I'd make my thoughts on the state of Armada and its successful goal to keep the game diverse heard. I look around and even though there are those that come up with anecdotal stories about how there are auto-include pieces the game appears to be extremely diverse.

Just watching the championships and even everyday gaming battle reports I just don't see any one piece that is mandatory and players still have success with all the ships to one point or another. I have never seen a game quite like it. Even the old VSD that was much ignored is now back after the last wave because of a new commander. FFG's way of handling unloved ships is quite smart in Armada, don't just give an upgrade for that ship make an upgrade most can take but it favors that one weakness. Brilliant.

Now we still have complaints about how Squadrons are a must and Flotillas seem to be over powered. My argument is that is not the right view to take and here's why. Squadrons are needed to have a well rounded list, but that is not the same as an auto-include because it's a game element and not just a single game piece. But they only benefit the over all fleet and they can not win the game alone, ever. So much like other game elements, like ship upgrades, you don't "have" to take them but you put yourself at a great disadvantage if you don't. And this was a purposefully done mechanic. Just like named characters flying our favorite ships seem to be integral to Star Wars so are Squadrons. X-Wings are "Star Wars" as much, if not more, than Star Destroyers. That's how the game was advertised and how it plays. But you get choices as to which Squadrons, how many to take and what role they play in "support" for the rest of your fleet. That's called diversity even if you feel the game would be better without them. The game would suffer greatly without their inclusion.

Now Flotillas are another argument. Why are they here and why do they feel like an auto-include? Well they are not an auto-include and many players don't use them all the time. Many MSU lists don't need them and don't take them. Who takes them? Large Ship Admirals! The Flotillas actually brought back the viability of the large ships. Think about it, large ships were for a time at a disadvantage due to activation sequence by MSU lists, and the large ships had issues with keeping Squadrons in range to give commands because their command range coverage is at a great disadvantage to MSU lists. With Flotillas those issues are fixed and it brings Large ships back into the game. But ironically it's also the Large Ship fans that hate these ships designed to help their hurting ships. And I believe it's not because FFG failed them but because it wasn't the fix they were looking for. But the one they were looking for wouldn't "fix" the game but instead throw game balance off in favor of large ships destroying the very diversity that makes this game great.

So yes, Two Ship Squadronless lists are not a thing and you have to build a balanced list to prevent hard counters. Why is this bad? Would we rather have a game where half the models become irrelevant to satisfy a small portion of the community? Because if we buff the already great large ships so they can fly all alone then we make taking all other elements of the game irrelevant and we make it about two ships just throwing dice.

Large Ships are still very very good and we see them All the time in lists, but they need support. Even better is that that support has many many different flavors. So will you support your ISD with Flotillas? GSD's? Light Cruisers? Raiders? Interdictor? They all are good at supporting your ISD and almost equally so. So you can't fly two solo ISD's, so what? That is not what the game was ever suppose to be about. Enjoy the diversity and relatively balanced game that has exceeded almost everyone's expectations. I know it did mine. Celebrate the diversity.

Thinking back to an earlier accusation another forum member made I am absolutely not employed by FFG and I am just a fan of Star Wars and the game. This is not a conspiracy to undermine anyone's opinion but just me expressing my thoughts after seeing a number of threads bringing up old topics that have vexed me a bit. That's all.

1 hour ago, Beatty said:

Because if we buff the already great large ships so they can fly all alone then we make taking all other elements of the game irrelevant and we make it about two ships just throwing dice.

Large Ships are still very very good and we see them All the time in lists, but they need support. Even better is that that support has many many different flavors. So will you support your ISD with Flotillas? GSD's? Light Cruisers? Raiders? Interdictor? They all are good at supporting your ISD and almost equally so. So you can't fly two solo ISD's, so what? That is not what the game was ever suppose to be about.

I can say to me it's not about buffing the 2 large ship fleets, but instead getting a better mix on the table altogether. You posted in my squadron thoughts post yesterday but seemed to miss the point of the post entirely.


Armada is diverse but extremely limited by the framework of the game.

As an Imperial player running an ISD list becomes a rousing bout of, "what can I sacrifice to maintain 4 activations and have squads?"

I can tell you right now the ISD I like to run is 179 points commander included. It's a big ship, but rather useless on it's own. So I have to support it with other ships. If I take a medium ship to back it up, I'll just barely be able to stuff a couple gozantis in there for activation and maybe 4 ties as a screen, The limitations of the current system reduce the diversity of my fleet. If I take a couple of small ships to back it up, by the time I've invested in upgrades to make them work I lose an activation to maintain that small screen, or even lose the screen too because of the cost of small ships.

It's just not the best system. Especially if you wanna talk about diversity.

A basic fleet should be able to fit a large, medium, small, and flotilla size ship and still uphold decent upgrades and at least 6 squadrons.

As is, for the cheapest of each class(imp)? 110+73+44+23+20+48=318 barebones

As is, for most expensive of each class(imp)? 120+93+62+28+38+96=437 barebones

The point I'm trying to express here is severe difficultly to maintain a "diverse" fleet without being extremely vulnerable one one area or another.



I love Armada, and even if Squadrons and small ships continue to take the lead in popularity I'll keep playing, but I feel there is a rock paper paper meta beginning to develop.

Large ships are beginning to become too costly for their value. MSUs are proving devastating against them and so are squadron heavy fleets. Why take a single 179 point ISD with only a single defense token set, single activation, centralized target, when for 13 points more you can run 3 kittens with enhanced arms that can throw up to 5 reds, each have their own defenses, activation, and can spread out? Better yet, because they're that cheap they also can manage a good set of fighters and even add some floatilla support. My ISD fleet can't brag that.

It's a good system. I love Armada. It's just not the best it could be. Plain and simple.

3 minutes ago, Darth Sanguis said:

I can say to me it's not about buffing the 2 large ship fleets, but instead getting a better mix on the table altogether. You posted in my squadron thoughts post yesterday but seemed to miss the point of the post entirely.


Armada is diverse but extremely limited by the framework of the game.

As an Imperial player running an ISD list becomes a rousing bout of, "what can I sacrifice to maintain 4 activations and have squads?"

I can tell you right now the ISD I like to run is 179 points commander included. It's a big ship, but rather useless on it's own. So I have to support it with other ships. If I take a medium ship to back it up, I'll just barely be able to stuff a couple gozantis in there for activation and maybe 4 ties as a screen, The limitations of the current system reduce the diversity of my fleet. If I take a couple of small ships to back it up, by the time I've invested in upgrades to make them work I lose an activation to maintain that small screen, or even lose the screen too because of the cost of small ships.

It's just not the best system. Especially if you wanna talk about diversity.

A basic fleet should be able to fit a large, medium, small, and flotilla size ship and still uphold decent upgrades and at least 6 squadrons.

As is, for the cheapest of each class(imp)? 110+73+44+23+20+48=318 barebones

As is, for most expensive of each class(imp)? 120+93+62+28+38+96=437 barebones

The point I'm trying to express here is severe difficultly to maintain a "diverse" fleet without being extremely vulnerable one one area or another.



I love Armada, and even if Squadrons and small ships continue to take the lead in popularity I'll keep playing, but I feel there is a rock paper paper meta beginning to develop.

Large ships are beginning to become too costly for their value. MSUs are proving devastating against them and so are squadron heavy fleets. Why take a single 179 point ISD with only a single defense token set, single activation, centralized target, when for 13 points more you can run 3 kittens with enhanced arms that can throw up to 5 reds, each have their own defenses, activation, and can spread out? Better yet, because they're that cheap they also can manage a good set of fighters and even add some floatilla support. My ISD fleet can't brag that.

It's a good system. I love Armada. It's just not the best it could be. Plain and simple.

Liberty counters small ships, as does the new boarding team stuff. Small ships are gonna get SHOT if they come in close there...

1 minute ago, geek19 said:

Liberty counters small ships, as does the new boarding team stuff. Small ships are gonna get SHOT if they come in close there...

Yes and no. I've seen libertys get eaten alive at long range by small ships. Especially once flanked. Especially Especially if there's a bomber wing.

Boarding crews are a bit of a wash. At close range, there's really not much one can do against a large ship already, especially if the defender isn't a large ship itself.

Boarding crews seem more effective (in theory) for small maneuverable ships that can evade the powerful arcs of a large ship and deliver a quick hit a close range that lowers the defenses or deals conditions(at least for the imps, current versions of the cards kinda limit which rebs can even use 'em).

Either way, seeing two rebel corvettes and medium base imperial ship doesn't put me at ease, medium base ships are hella expensive on the imp side, and the rebels were devastating with the small/fast/maneuverable ships they already had.

Darth Sanguis I hear you but I don't entirely agree. You love running a hugely expensive beat-fist ISD, which would be a scary thing to play against, but you also want all the advantages of someone who spreads their points around to multiple ships. You sacrifice the diversity of your fleet to get an advantage for one ship. The common saying is "Putting your eggs all in one basket" but we also know that's not the best Tactical decision to make the majority of the time.

So while I am glad you enjoy the game a lot I just disagree with the approach to your point. I say if you want One powerful ship and still have 4 activations and enough Squadrons you might be expecting too much for the 400 point range. Also 400 points is the suggested level for tournament play and you can play at 500 or more if you and your opponent want. So maybe if you increase your point level you will be happier and then you will get that which you are looking for and your opponents will be able to bring the extra goodies they've been looking for too.

So I may disagree and I'm sorry you feel I missed your point on that other thread, which is totally possible, but we will disagree on something's. But if you bring a ship with all the trimmings ready to beat down you have to sacrifice something. Either activations or support elements.

2 minutes ago, Beatty said:

But if you bring a ship with all the trimmings ready to beat down you have to sacrifice something. Either activations or support elements.

This was my example personally, I'm aware of the reasons it's difficult to field that particular version of that ship, but here's some food for thought.... all the " eggs in that basket " are worth 3 tie intercept squadrons . Which is what I was trying to convey with this section:

36 minutes ago, Darth Sanguis said:

It's just not the best system. Especially if you wanna talk about diversity.

A basic fleet should be able to fit a large, medium, small, and flotilla size ship and still uphold decent upgrades and at least 6 squadrons.

As is, for the cheapest of each class(imp)? 110+73+44+23+20+48=318 barebones

As is, for most expensive of each class(imp)? 120+93+62+28+38+96=437 barebones

The point I'm trying to express here is severe difficultly to maintain a "diverse" fleet without being extremely vulnerable one one area or another.

The current meta is basically stating that every fleet that is not a decently built MSU and/or squad heavy may suffer severe inefficiencies such as lack of activations, lack of defense tokens, lack of fighter defenses, lack of firepower.


Not to say large ships aren't viable, I just won 2nd in a tournament with 2 ISDs 2 Gozantis and no fighters after all, but that fleet was not diverse, nor was it balanced, had I faced the first placer in the pairings, I would not have scored so high.


The current system doesn't encourage diversity, it encourages niches. Diversity would be fleets could have large ships and are still very well rounded in all areas. Large medium smalls and floatillas with squads, that's diverse.

4 minutes ago, Darth Sanguis said:

The current system doesn't encourage diversity, it encourages niches. Diversity would be fleets could have large ships and are still very well rounded in all areas. Large medium smalls and floatillas with squads, that's diverse.

Define your Variables please.

Because to me, you seem to be desiring a niche , while ignoring the impressive Diversity of Niches we have already to build with.

But isn't fielding an ISD it's own special case though? You can't meaningfully fit in everything if you look at them in terms of base siE defining the ship. Look at dials. VSD is a large because 3 dials. Demo is a medium because 2. If you do it like that, then you can fit in a large, medium, small and flotilla with points for squads. THAT way makes more sense to me, as it's a clearer indication of what size the ship is. The ISD can fit in the same list as an Interdictor or gladiator, a raider, and a flotilla with some squad points too.

If you look rebel it makes the most sense too. Nebulon are medium ships, because a HP and B upgrades needed/cost. Same with mc30s. Assault frigate is just a light Large ship. View them in that context and build accordingly.

I think that what we need to remember is that in Armada every ship has a weak area and a weak area for ISD is cost. And Armada is good in putting a pressure on players and forcing hard decisions and sacrifices during fleet building stage. No matter what kind of fleet you're building, you'll always be some points short from the ideal list for your fleet type.

I still don't understand the issue with fielding ISDs: if you're bringing Christmas tree, then it'll be a single ISD in the fleet and there are still enough points for a decent amount of ships and squads. If you're bringing two ISDs, it means that the bulk of the points is in those ISDs themselves and now some significant sacrifices need to be made in the rest of the fleet, be it squadrons, upgrades or ship count. And this is ok in my opinion, as otherwise most fleets would just consist of as many ISDs as possible.

Just now, Drasnighta said:

Define your Variables please.

Because to me, you seem to be desiring a niche , while ignoring the impressive Diversity of Niches we have already to build with.

Oh crap he did the thing.

Yeah? From MY point of view the Jedi are evil!

As defined by Merriam-Webster:

Diversity

"the condition of having or being composed of differing elements"

As defined by Oxford Dictionaries:

Niche

"A specialized segment of the market for a particular kind of product or service."

I would like to say your statement is very astute, except that the "Diversity of Niches" are becoming, seemingly, less diverse.



I'd like to see diverse fleets. Fleets that can have their cake, and eat it too. There's no reason a player should have to sacrifice a very basic aspect of fleet combat/defense such as fighters, or actiavtions, just to have a diverse fleet. When we ship Aircraft Carriers out to war.... they come with the aircraft and the guns....

I know it will never happen, but I thought my idea was fairly good.

see if interested:

We are granted 400 points.

Be the diversity.

27 minutes ago, geek19 said:

But isn't fielding an ISD it's own special case though? You can't meaningfully fit in everything if you look at them in terms of base siE defining the ship. Look at dials. VSD is a large because 3 dials. Demo is a medium because 2. If you do it like that, then you can fit in a large, medium, small and flotilla with points for squads. THAT way makes more sense to me, as it's a clearer indication of what size the ship is. The ISD can fit in the same list as an Interdictor or gladiator, a raider, and a flotilla with some squad points too.

If you look rebel it makes the most sense too. Nebulon are medium ships, because a HP and B upgrades needed/cost. Same with mc30s. Assault frigate is just a light Large ship. View them in that context and build accordingly.

That may be true in terms of how to view specific sizes, but it doesn't change the fact that as a part of the game, it's becoming increasingly more difficult to use due to the shift in favor of multiple smaller ships. Or that fleets are heavily influenced, on the competitive front, to not use that particular part of the game because the cost out weighs the benefits. Basically everything we've discussed boils down to one statement,

"It 's a good system. I love Armada. It's just not the best it could be. Plain and simple."

I don't mean offense to the OP, but this conversation is particularly disgusting:
1. People who love the game tend to have a stake in defending the meta. This is exampled in Armada's predecessor, Xwing. Its exampled in Magic. To disgusting levels of imbalance in each game, things that started out "fine", didn't end up "fine". Wave 4 of Xwing into Wave6, end of wave 6 all lists included one turret, sometimes two. In this sense, the community here behaves exactly as any other game community does. This is not surprising.
2. The screaming of no meta: This is yet again a fantasy. See above.
3. You guys aren't even considering his points for even a second, you haven't made a logical explanation as to why ISDs with his upgrades which amount to 11 to 33 points is a deciding factor for him to be losing. There is still no explanation as to why Squadron fleets are ok with absolutely no hard counters (other squadron lists with more AA, MSu doesn't count as we have data that its even, not a hard counter), yet large ship lists have 2 distinct meta counters.
4. Beatty, your flottilla argument is numerically unsound: 90% of fleets had a flotilla, something like 98%-100% of top4 fleets had a flotilla. A very high percentage had 2 or more. MSU uses huge numbers of flotillas. Demo 5Z, 4Shrimp3Transport. This is unsound.

Continuing to just exclaim the game is fine is digging a trench into your position also. I've done my testing and consideration of counter points to my argument. I've talked about how to use AA or what the minimal squadron count is. I've also talked about how to use squadrons in mass, intel, and I've championed Strategic fleets.

I have table experience to know that AA-centric metas are particularly rock-paper-scissors and unhealthy. Particularly unhealthy as it pushes the game into a specific focus. I know this first hand. I've [played both sides of this coin.

I haven't seen people try the opposite. Trying 2 ISD lists for long periods of time. Go gunship style. Play lots of ships vs 134 bombers with 2 BCC and Toryn. I haven't seen people tell me how they understand that they can FCT Yavaris bombers into an actual non-moved Yavaris strike as an opening engagement that one shots all small ships except the mc30 (crippled), and within 2 turns two shots a large ship.
I also haven't seen people refute the numbers on the statistically overly effectiveness of squadron firepower based on rerolls. This is a key mathematical tenant of FFG games.
I haven't seen people breakdown the number of dice thrown from MSU as opposed to large ships simply by activation advantage giving all the control to an MSU opponent.

Has anyone playtested a pass rule like in Imperial Assault? I think number of activations became a little more important than FFG anticipated, and adding flotillas to fix it (if it was intended as a "fix" for that) just seemed to mandate 1-2 flotillas.

18 minutes ago, Blail Blerg said:

I haven't seen people try the opposite. Trying 2 ISD lists for long periods of time. Go gunship style. Play lots of ships vs 134 bombers with 2 BCC and Toryn.

I did all that and believe that large ship fleets are viable. (And in the case of 2BCC+Toryn fleets, my question is - why are those BCC and Toryn still alive? )

Blail you've shown that you are just not liking the game and want it to be "fixed" by making your list work better for you. I have read many of your posts and you are one that seems to be loud and you don't like anyone who would challenge your thoughts on the matter.

You've made your point and have been heard. Some agree with you but most do not. You scream "unbalance" but have yet to prove any of it besides your own thoughts on the matter. So we heard you but we just remain unconvinced of what you are trying to prove. Not insulting you either, we just don't see eye to eye and you have yet to bring the hard evidence to justify your strong opinions on the matter. Nothing wrong with that.

try playing the game at 500 points and I think almost all your issues will disappear. Two ISD's can be ran with lots of upgrades. And you have points left over for some small ships and Squadrons. Try using a rule already in game before rewriting the rule set all together.

6 minutes ago, Beatty said:

Blail you've shown that you are just not liking the game and want it to be "fixed" by making your list work better for you. I have read many of your posts and you are one that seems to be loud and you don't like anyone who would challenge your thoughts on the matter.

You've made your point and have been heard. Some agree with you but most do not. You scream "unbalance" but have yet to prove any of it besides your own thoughts on the matter. So we heard you but we just remain unconvinced of what you are trying to prove. Not insulting you either, we just don't see eye to eye and you have yet to bring the hard evidence to justify your strong opinions on the matter. Nothing wrong with that.

Actually to be fair if you read Blail's full arguments where he originally posted them, and most thereafter, they do incorporate data. It's what we should be taking away from it, and I think a core difference of opinion in design philosophy which is leading to all the debate.

Or thats my take anyway.

End result. We all have different opinions on what would make armada better, what to change, what to keep, what to tweak. Yes we can be passionate about our beliefs. But at the end of the day peeps, we should shake hands and say "nice argument-i don't particularly agree with it, but i love your devotion to the game and will always defend your right to disagree."

I present my opinions on here. Sometimes people like them, sometimes not so much, to put it mildly. It's ok, though. We're all part of team armada. Even if some of you are those darn Impies (joking of course)

I will have to go back over it then because I haven't seen all his posts. But I still feel that many of the people who have issues with the game, which are still only a minority of players, would have those issues solved if they played at 500 instead of 400.

It just sounds like they really really really want to take ISD's kitted out and 400 points is just too small to do that and bring in the support the game needs.

So instead of rewriting the rules let's use the rules we already have. And if we see issues with lists in battle reports from regionals or Worlds then let's address it then. I just haven't seen any serious issues as of yet.

So I guess stay vigilant but don't say things are broken because it doesn't fit your play style.

51 minutes ago, pt106 said:

I did all that and believe that large ship fleets are viable. (And in the case of 2BCC+Toryn fleets, my question is - why are those BCC and Toryn still alive? )

Because there's a large ship and a horde of bombers in between you and them.

5 minutes ago, Valca said:

Because there's a large ship and a horde of bombers in between you and them.

... which usually means (At least it did in Wave4) that you were either outnavigated or have a better target now. But thats a topic for a separate discussion

Alternating activation games always have something of a premium on activation count. It's just a design drawback of the mechanic that games have to work around but since its more of a bidding advantage there tends to be something of a magic number where you're fairly safe and bidding further is a waste. That generally means that expensive stuff has a place, but rather than it causing you to have less stuff, you just need to make sure you take cheaper stuff.

@pt106 I think you should write an ISD commanders guide