Mon Karen has this weird Stockholme Syndrome effect. People really dig it even when it does nothing. I've had so many opponents go "Sweet, I accuracy your brace and 5 damage! WOOOO! Mon Karen!"

The only upgrade I like with it is SW7, honestly. Or maybe spinal.

That's what I figured, but I had to ask.

I think of all of us @Brikhause talked to him most. I kind of listened in. I think the overall picture I got was that this guy was super intentional about how what he did and how he did things. And that he has an awesome conceptual grasp of this game.

It reminded me of Bane- You merely adapted to Armada, I was born in it, molded by it haha

Sometimes, i know this is true of me and probablu many of us if we are honest, think our opinions are ao founded in truth we get a little big for our pants and think we know more than we do. That was how I felt keenly after sitting and listening to him for 2.5 hours. Because let me tell you, whenever someone wasn't talking to him, there was NO ONE peicing apart, hyper analyzing, or as intent on that final game as Michael Gernes.

This is super encouraging to hear, in my opinion. We may only have one guy working on our game, but at least he really cares.

10 hours ago, BiggsIRL said:

Or let our resident numbers / logic guy reassure you why he thinks FFG will "fix the problem". http://xwingtactics.blogspot.com/2017/05/will-ffg-get-out-its-nerf-bat.html#more

I prefer "the un-offical voice-of-reason for the Armada community", but numbers/logic guy seems pretty accurate too.

Just me guessing, but I think (and hope) that some of the offensive retrofit upgrades in the upcoming wave will help ships deal with squadrons a little better, and balance out the ship to Squadron ratio.

I had the briefest of conversations with him following Caldias. I merely reported the state of our community in Austin and San Antonio and he listened intently and asked a lot of questions. I have the same impression of him as a deeply caring man with a good grasp of the game.

I worked on game design briefly, and there is an entirely different perspective to sitting in that seat on the table, and quite a bit that is learned when you sit down at a table with people to work out how your game will work and what features you're going to implement, and how to deal with people who inevitably break your game. It isn't easy. Baby steps are critical there. Games like this feature a lot of complicated systems interaction and too big of a push on one feature can seriously reverberate throughout the rest of the game, having an equally detrimental effect on the emergent meta.

That's my background, and I willingly admit - that flavours a lot of my decision making process and interpretations when it comes to rules... Its not good enough to just focus on the one item in front of you - decision chains need to be followed, precedences accounted for, and even potential future-decisions proofed with... Its not easy. It is one of the hardest things to be able to sit down and do... So I don't envy his job with it... he does a lot of good work with little resources...

... I just wish I could help him out.

TIE Defenders Ruin Everything! Who decided to let that legends poodo into the universe!

On 5/7/2017 at 11:09 PM, Vergilius said:

I worked on game design briefly, and there is an entirely different perspective to sitting in that seat on the table, and quite a bit that is learned when you sit down at a table with people to work out how your game will work and what features you're going to implement, and how to deal with people who inevitably break your game. It isn't easy. Baby steps are critical there. Games like this feature a lot of complicated systems interaction and too big of a push on one feature can seriously reverberate throughout the rest of the game, having an equally detrimental effect on the emergent meta.

Interesting...wow. I have never worked in game design, but I am a designer by profession, I know that the "devil is in the details," and, as Obi Wan said, "we must be cautious."

On 5/7/2017 at 11:13 PM, Drasnighta said:

That's my background, and I willingly admit - that flavours a lot of my decision making process and interpretations when it comes to rules... Its not good enough to just focus on the one item in front of you - decision chains need to be followed, precedences accounted for, and even potential future-decisions proofed with... Its not easy. It is one of the hardest things to be able to sit down and do... So I don't envy his job with it... he does a lot of good work with little resources...

... I just wish I could help him out.

It truly is an unenviable job when there are problems, and a coveted one when it is fun and exciting for both factions. I think we all wish we could help. Perhaps voicing concerns and offering ideas is, in the end, helpful as the designers ponder the details. If anything, it gives them proof that players really care.

My hope is that Armada doesn't go the way competitive X-Wing went as far as erratas and FAQs. The biggest problem --post the Phantom/Fat Han of Wave 4 meta-- is the awful Jumpmaster. However, instead of correcting the Jumpmaster, they corrected everything around it, hoping it would curb the use of the Jumpmaster. It didn't. Players just load out the OP ship with other crew, weapons and modifications and keep easily kicking the crap out of other squads. If the Rebels didn't have Regen, Biggs and Sabine, they'd always be fodder like the recently nerfed Imperials, more times than not. They missed the mark so very badly and it seems they are going to stick to protecting their pride (or whatever the driver is to not touch the ships cost, stats and dial; the actual problem) and continue to ignore the rotting elephant in the room. I know the game is complex, but when there is ONE big issue, please focus on that, and keep the other related game modifications and crew like they were. This logic seems to be sound, even in a complex game.

I don't want this fate to befall Armada. My friends and I are really starting to get the awesome game mechanics and details down. It's fun!

12 hours ago, Vergilius said:

I had the briefest of conversations with him following Caldias. I merely reported the state of our community in Austin and San Antonio and he listened intently and asked a lot of questions. I have the same impression of him as a deeply caring man with a good grasp of the game.

I worked on game design briefly, and there is an entirely different perspective to sitting in that seat on the table, and quite a bit that is learned when you sit down at a table with people to work out how your game will work and what features you're going to implement, and how to deal with people who inevitably break your game. It isn't easy. Baby steps are critical there. Games like this feature a lot of complicated systems interaction and too big of a push on one feature can seriously reverberate throughout the rest of the game, having an equally detrimental effect on the emergent meta.

Like....CC Aces introduced by a campaign environment skewing a competitive meta?

1 hour ago, moodswing5537 said:

Like....CC Aces introduced by a campaign environment skewing a competitive meta?

I'm a maybe on that point. Most of them are just fine.

the biggest problem is compound effects, e.g. Norra plus all the rerolls and the extension to other bomber units. This is usually where game design gets off.

5 minutes ago, Vergilius said:

I'm a maybe on that point. Most of them are just fine.

the biggest problem is compound effects, e.g. Norra plus all the rerolls and the extension to other bomber units. This is usually where game design gets off.

I totally agree. Look at Magic the Gathering. After 30+ sets, you eventually have to say "wow, I think there are mechanics that need to either change or just go away...". They solved it by going to a limited/banned card structure, but I don't think we are any where near that in armada. FFG has shown the intelligence that they are thinking WAY ahead so far, so card interactions seem fairly thought out. This is one of the best systems I've seen about not trumping future effects, but only time will tell. The Rieekan effect is obviously something they will have to look at moving forward.

4 minutes ago, moodswing5537 said:

I totally agree. Look at Magic the Gathering. After 30+ sets, you eventually have to say "wow, I think there are mechanics that need to either change or just go away...". They solved it by going to a limited/banned card structure, but I don't think we are any where near that in armada. FFG has shown the intelligence that they are thinking WAY ahead so far, so card interactions seem fairly thought out. This is one of the best systems I've seen about not trumping future effects, but only time will tell. The Rieekan effect is obviously something they will have to look at moving forward.

Another problem with MTG is the rampant net decking. You get a handful of top tier decks that defines the meta. If you want to play off-meta, you need to have an answer for each deck. Or you just play with friends, which I find more rewarding. Armada is just getting into net listing.

The thing with Armada is even if you net list, you need to be able to play the list properly, which isn't always easy, especially if you're unfamiliar with what to expect out of ships.

20 hours ago, Mep said:

A few things to understand about Armada, first, it is not X-wing. It is a small game for FFG and doesn't receive anywhere near the attention FFG gives X-Wing. Don't expect regular FQAs.

Second, squadrons are part of Armada. Go watch Rogue run if you want to see what an Armada battle is suppose to look like.

Third the Flotillas have provided a negative game experience since they came out and have dominated worlds the past two times. And yes, anyone that hasn't played Armada before can just watch one of the past two finals and see this very clearly.

Forth, this Flotilla problem may get addressed in Wave 6. If not, this game is in trouble, since FFG seems to take the "let them play" attitude toward this game. They took a similar approach to Netrunner until it hit their sales hard on that game. Only then did changes come.

On your third point I do not share your opinon, I watched both worlds finals live and cannot come to that conclusion.

I agree with your first two points, and I hope that FFG does something to satisfy those who do have issues with flotillas - without taking away flotilla usefulness for those who don't have a problem with them.

48 minutes ago, Vergilius said:

I'm a maybe on that point. Most of them are just fine.

the biggest problem is compound effects, e.g. Norra plus all the rerolls and the extension to other bomber units. This is usually where game design gets off.

These are called multiplicative effects (especially BCC). And I've been warning the whole forum about it for months

11 minutes ago, Caldias said:

The thing with Armada is even if you net list, you need to be able to play the list properly, which isn't always easy, especially if you're unfamiliar with what to expect out of ships.

Yes but it's net listing with the most forgiving commander available. I don't think net listing is a problem in itself, but net listing frequently spirals out of control. I've frequently seen in Hearthstone where one deck is doing very well, and then a counter shows up and then literally 1/3-1/2 of games are the counter deck. And then a counter for the counter needs to be made. Originality is lost in an effort to stay competitive. And Worlds already showed us you're better off taking him than finding something to beat him.

Also, it's possible the correct counter to Rieekan would be Mothma MC30s which you already demonstrated. And the countless times you have beaten max bomber lists supports that.

I think the way to get around Rieekan is just building and knowing how to play as 2nd player, for one. That helps turn his advantage into nothing if you just kill stuff after it goes anyway. Most Rieekan lists I see don't have much of a bid.

29 minutes ago, Caldias said:

I think the way to get around Rieekan is just building and knowing how to play as 2nd player, for one. That helps turn his advantage into nothing if you just kill stuff after it goes anyway. Most Rieekan lists I see don't have much of a bid.

How does that work out? Care to pm me with more. I am curious on this.

4 hours ago, OgRib said:

On your third point I do not share your opinon, I watched both worlds finals live and cannot come to that conclusion.

I agree with your first two points, and I hope that FFG does something to satisfy those who do have issues with flotillas - without taking away flotilla usefulness for those who don't have a problem with them.

The history of Netrunner and of course many other games, tells a very different story about negative game experiences. There are of course always those who relished in the game mechanics that provided those negative play experiences mainly due to them winning most of their games using those mechanics. Winning is fine and all, up to the point you no longer have anyone to play with. FFG needs to pay close attention to NPE and stomp them out of their games when and where ever they arise.

As to the worlds results, in both X-Wing and Armada there are ships that are clear winners. Any reasonable person can point those ships out.

@Mep don't confuse me with someone who dominates, I just enjoy the game and I don't have a problem with flotillas or relay. I like the fact that - for example two flotillas enable me to run a big heavily loaded MC80, a pair of TRC90s, and a defensive fighter screen.

@OgRibTwo flotillas won't cause a NGE and that number wasn't being used at worlds. The NGE comes mostly from the activation spam that the huge game advantage this causes. Even with the elongated time, what was it 3 hours?, for the finals this year, they could not play the game to completion because of the spam. Now I am not saying that wasn't a fair match or a good one, they both had similar lists and the same amount of spam, but it doesn't make for a good casual game.

9 hours ago, Blail Blerg said:

These are called multiplicative effects (especially BCC). And I've been warning the whole forum about it for months

The forum has been aware of it. You're not exactly a profit of doom or a martyr or whatever else we want to call this warning. Most of us want to see harder results before we settle into a conclusion. Its just now most of us feel more comfortable in that.

4 minutes ago, Vergilius said:

The forum has been aware of it. You're not exactly a profit of doom or a martyr or whatever else we want to call this warning. Most of us want to see harder results before we settle into a conclusion. Its just now most of us feel more comfortable in that.

Oh, i guess 6/top8 worlds same commander, all 134 squadrons, all 8 rebel, 0 imperials, small ships + masses of squadorn enhancing upgrades (and GH medium) aren't enough for you. okay.