1 minute ago, Sybreed said:

welp, my bad for not knowing how attending the tournament works. Still, if we see the archetype mentionned above, that's still indicative of something. Kind of.

No worries.

I mean, to Clarify completely:

If you win a Nationals, NA Champs, or Regionals in the United States or Canada, you are given a guaranteed seat at worlds, but you need to pay for everything on your own (Travel, Accom, Ticket, etc).

I don't think it applies this worlds , but I do know they have stated that for the future, if you win a National Championships (or the European Championships) outside of the US and Canada, you will be given a seat at worlds, and for some of those events (like the EU Champs), your trip to the US to compete is paid for, for you and a Guest.... This is supposed to apply to other EU Nationals as well, but I don't know if it will next year or going forward.

Once the reserved tickets are decided upon, anyone else can register, book their ticket, and go .... Which opens it up to everyone.

7 minutes ago, Sybreed said:

welp, my bad for not knowing how attending the tournament works, thought only the best were invited. Still, if we see the archetype mentionned above winning everything, that's still indicative of something. Kind of.

Not really. Worlds could merely be its own meta, where the attendees change from their local metas in response to rumors such as a minimum of 4 activations being necessary, or 3 flotillas, or certain upgrades/fleet archetypes being unviable, and so they self-fulfill that meta by creating it in response to its rumored existence.

4 hours ago, Snipafist said:

Hahahaha no flotillas-related errata at all!

The forum is going to go up in flames sometime today...

The errata likely wouldn't come until after Worlds, if at all.

I can attack with squadrons after I deploy them with RLBs? I'm shocked.

59 minutes ago, ovinomanc3r said:

Is not exactly with this command. I will try yo explain myself.

With the squadron command you can activate squadrons.

On the other hand RLB add a new effect that replace the default effect but it does for each squadron. The FAQ clarifies that now with the squadron command "modified" the activation of the set aside squadron is a part of the squadron command resolution so you do both (place and avtivate). It doesn't say that you can activate those squadrons with the command as you normally do.

In other words: as a part of the command resolution you may activate those squadrons. What means you can do whatever with the command and activate those squadrons as an effect of that command resolution.

What is not exactly the same than "you may activate those squadrons with this command."

I hope I explained myself

You're skipping over the part on the card where it says you have to place the squadrons instead.

This is a "Card Clarification" its not an errata, so you still have to do what the card says. The card says you place squadrons instead of activating them. FAQ is saying the squadrons that you put our are available to activate (since they are within close-medium). Unfortunately, you are assuming that this is part of placing: it is not. The FAQ is clearly stating that you PLACE all squads from RLB together, then choose squads you wish to activate. Those squads are not given a free activation.

RLB says you place squads instead of activating, so you have to give up activations to place squads. This is not replaced. (for example, warlord has to change an accuracy to a hit. FAQ says it can change to a double. Is the FAQ saying that warlord can change a blank into a double? no.)

Does FFG want to see more Devastators played?

Needa and TRC, intel your own evade?

2 minutes ago, Warlord Zepnick said:

Does FFG want to see more Devastators played?

Needa and TRC, intel your own evade?

If you have Needa you arent intelling.

1 minute ago, Ginkapo said:

If you have Needa you arent intelling.

Silly me.

What uses do you envision for this intel clarification?

4 minutes ago, Warlord Zepnick said:

Does FFG want to see more Devastators played?

Needa and TRC, intel your own evade?

why would anyone intel their tokens

2 minutes ago, Warlord Zepnick said:

Silly me.

What uses do you envision for this intel clarification?

Vader

6 minutes ago, Lemmiwinks86 said:

Vader

???

14 minutes ago, Sybreed said:

why would anyone intel their tokens

Devastator

1 minute ago, Green Knight said:

Devastator

I know, I still think it's dumb!

44 minutes ago, NobodyInParticular said:

Not really. Worlds could merely be its own meta, where the attendees change from their local metas in response to rumors such as a minimum of 4 activations being necessary, or 3 flotillas, or certain upgrades/fleet archetypes being unviable, and so they self-fulfill that meta by creating it in response to its rumored existence.

The only problem with this is what I've noticed about Brikhause and a couple other top tier players—they stick to what they know because they know how to fly it well.

So when going into an unknown meta, my guess would be that they take what they are most comfortable with. They know the ins and outs of their lists. I've never played against such an exacting opponent as Brikhause when he played his Worlds list (augmented) against me. The level of precision and coordination was astounding.

31 minutes ago, thecolourred said:

You're skipping over the part on the card where it says you have to place the squadrons instead.

This is a "Card Clarification" its not an errata, so you still have to do what the card says. The card says you place squadrons instead of activating them. FAQ is saying the squadrons that you put our are available to activate (since they are within close-medium). Unfortunately, you are assuming that this is part of placing: it is not. The FAQ is clearly stating that you PLACE all squads from RLB together, then choose squads you wish to activate. Those squads are not given a free activation.

RLB says you place squads instead of activating, so you have to give up activations to place squads. This is not replaced. (for example, warlord has to change an accuracy to a hit. FAQ says it can change to a double. Is the FAQ saying that warlord can change a blank into a double? no.)

I don't skip the instead part.

Instead for me is clear to disallow from placing your entire value and activate other squadrons with your entire value.

With RLB and a squadron command for each squadron you would activate you can choose the following: you can activate the squadron normally OR you can place a set aside squadron. After placing the squadrons they can be activated as part of this command resolution. Activating place squadrons is part of the squadron command effect. Now with the squadron command you can activate normally or RLB and RLB FAQ clearly says that the activation of placed squadron is part of that command resolution that you are using to trigger RLB

1 hour ago, Beatty said:

I think it's only a few people expecting there to be an Errata on Flotillas. If you go over the threads it's mostly a few passionate players that fully believe there needs to be change, a few that fully believe there doesn't need to be any change and most are ambivalent or silent on the matter.

So unless there is some serious issues with Flotillas at World's we won't see any changes because there hasn't been any data coming out of regionals or nationals showing any issues with Flotillas or Squadrons. It's mostly people's opinions and anecdotal stories perpetuating the belief that Flotillas and Squadrons are not inline with the rest of the products. And that's not enough, data don't care about "feelings".

Again, without data coming out of Tournaments there will be no changes. So please don't be disappointed when we don't see any more FAQ's for another year.

I feel like we should COMPLETELY be disappointed when we don't see anymore FAQS for another year. haha.

I disagree with the rest of your assertions, but I personally have no more fight in me on this subject.

1 hour ago, Warlord Zepnick said:

The errata likely wouldn't come until after Worlds, if at all.

Yes and we got people discussing about who said or not when the errata would come if with the FAQ or after the Worlds.

37 minutes ago, WuFame said:

I feel like we should COMPLETELY be disappointed when we don't see anymore FAQS for another year. haha.

I disagree with the rest of your assertions, but I personally have no more fight in me on this subject.

We can disagree but I have yet to see any data supporting your position and I have seen many posts with data from regionals and nationals supporting the balance of Flotillas and Squadrons. (Balanced meaning that they don't tip the game overly so when you take multiples of the same model. Not whether people like the idea that they are an integral part of the game now.)

FFG doesn't make Errata's unless tournament data shows a huge imbalance in the over all game, like the old Phantoms, and just because there is a dislike for a certain mechanic in the game without data supporting it it won't be changed. Now FAQ is different and if people were misinterpreting the rules we will hear about it or a clarification.

That's what most of the FAQ's are, rules clarifications not actual Errata's. But the rules for Flotillas are pretty clear and don't need clarification, you want an actual rules change and that is Rare.

Just now, Beatty said:

We can disagree but I have yet to see any data supporting your position and I have seen many posts with data from regionals and nationals supporting the balance of Flotillas and Squadrons.

FFG doesn't make Errata's unless tournament data shows a huge imbalance in the over all game, like the old Phantoms, and just because there is a dislike for a certain mechanic in the game without data supporting it it won't be changed. Now FAQ is different and if people were misinterpreting the rules we will hear about it or a clarification.

That's what most of the FAQ's are, rules clarifications not actual Errata's. But the rules for Flotillas are pretty clear and don't need clarification, you want an actual rules change and that is Rare.

I appreciate your opinion. I disagree the data isn't there.

5 minutes ago, WuFame said:

I appreciate your opinion. I disagree the data isn't there.

I honestly would like to see some please. Honestly! I would like to have an actual discussion on the facts and not go back and forth over Anecdotal Stories about Ben. Because Old Ben turned out to be an excellent player and it wasn't the game rule's fault. (Looking back at an old discussion where the person blamed for abusing the rules over Squadrons was actually an excellent player and would have won no matter what he brought to the table.)

The data says two things about this:

1 - nearly every fleet at the top tables during Wave 5 had a flotilla

2 - there was a high diversity among the fleet types at the top tables

so, you're both right.

1 hour ago, Sybreed said:

???

You can target one of your own defense tokens with Intel Officer and then spend that token with Vader (commander) ability. That will get your defense token immediately discarded and work for Devastator

I made it through all 10 pages, do I get some prizes?*

*skimming counts, right?

57 minutes ago, shmitty said:

The data says two things about this:

1 - nearly every fleet at the top tables during Wave 5 had a flotilla

2 - there was a high diversity among the fleet types at the top tables

so, you're both right.

I do admit Flotillas are an integral part of the game and if you want your large ship list to be competitive you should bring Flotillas, but they are not unbalanced or broken.

Like Squadrons, they are not tougher than other parts of the game, but competitive lists will bring them for well round game play. You feel it when they're not there.

(Ironically I say that even though my CC list has an ISD and two light cruisers but no Flotilla. I don't think Iwill need one until I get to 450. So they are not always needed.)

1 hour ago, ovinomanc3r said:

I don't skip the instead part.

Instead for me is clear to disallow from placing your entire value and activate other squadrons with your entire value.

With RLB and a squadron command for each squadron you would activate you can choose the following: you can activate the squadron normally OR you can place a set aside squadron. After placing the squadrons they can be activated as part of this command resolution. Activating place squadrons is part of the squadron command effect. Now with the squadron command you can activate normally or RLB and RLB FAQ clearly says that the activation of placed squadron is part of that command resolution that you are using to trigger RLB

So then why require a squadron command AND have an "instead of" clause? Why not just say "Before you resolve a squadron command you may remove any number of squadrons from this card and place them at distance 1. They may not move if activated this turn."

You are creating your own interpretation based on what you want. Not what is there.