Some quick post-Worlds 2017 thoughts...

1 - Congrats to Norm and Team Toronto. While 3 of the Final Four were Rieekan A-Holes, I want to stress that Toronto did work to optimize their squadron mix.

2 - Justin and Nathan have two consecutive Final Four finishes. Given the scoring format of Armada, you gotta give them props for consistency.

3 - I think "2+3" (2 combat ships + 3 flotillas) is different than traditional MSU (multiple ship units).

4 - On Rieekan, Yavaris, Flotillas, Squadrons + Relay...

This is probably more useful to newer players (we want the community to grow and we ARE the best FFG community - Nathan let Norm do a missed opportunity in the Finals!) but I need to discuss a brief history of Armada for context... I apologize for not giving proper credit where due but I figure I'll be corrected and this was not meant to be disrespectful. As always, YMMV.

Wave1:

GenCon 2015 - The GenCon Special. Squadrons suck!

Worlds 2015 - Jon R. beats the GenCon Special. A-Wings are OP'ed!

Wave 2:

With Ackbar Gunline being OP'ed, Rhymerballs and Demolisher define the meta and are needed by Imps to counter. World Vassal Cup 2016 leads to the "Clonisher" builds (hey, Raiders get used). Rieekan is needed to stop the Demolisher triple-tap.

Regional Season... PT106's 2x ISD + 3 Raiders wins two Regionals. No squadrons!

US Nationals 2016 - 8YT (Rogue) defeat Rhymer and Demolisher.

GenCon 2016 - Norm wins GenCon against D. Lee's "mirror" with a 2-ship build! 2 activations! New players should study Norm's squadron mix - it's very elegant. Kristjan has a 2 Vic + 3 build that does well in Canada. This author notices that Team Toronto is a squadron heavy meta and these guys appear to be very strong at optimizing squadron mixes.

Wave 3 & 4: Flotillas can't be easily killed by Demolisher. Cheap squadron pushers can alpha Rogues.

Thanks @CaribbeanNinja the existence of flotillas and Most Wanted does pretty much kill all other RED objectives which is boring.

German Nationals... Tokra's 8 Flotilla build is just the stereotype of German efficiency - he designs the most efficient build ever! It's super hard to score off him.

Worlds 2016 - JJ wins with double-intel Y-Wing rolling thunder vs. Justin's Flotilla Cage (both are 2+3 builds).

Regionals 2017 - Sean's SuperWhale build wins two Regionals including a 50-player field in Maryland. Britt wins Michigan Regional with a variant.

Ardhaedel(sp?), Ginkapo, and Caldias make Ram City and trad MSUs viable.

Note: Brawlers like Admo and Demo are rightly feared but they involve the RISK of getting stuck in.

Wave 5:

Worlds 2017...

Looks like Armada is having two Waves every year... perhaps, the meta has not changed significantly between this shortened Worlds schedule (e.g., bringing a better squadron mix)...

My thoughts- YMMV:

a) Rieekan - He eliminates the alpha strike. imagine a card that says... "Counter with your full battery." Sounds strong, right? In a game where activations and order is a big part of the game, it doesn't matter which order you choose. By eliminating this choice, the game is less interesting. An ace squadron zombie can pin your squadrons down. Rieekan players are hard to score big on... (haha, sorry I did Table Biggs 10-0 at US Nats but this was BEFORE flotillas and we both had to be super aggro because we took byes and had to catch the leaders after Round 1).

Note: At that time, to me, Rieekan was not top tier because he didn't help you DIRECTLY win by a bigger margin if that makes sense. I mean... you were losing a ship so how big could you be winning by?

b) Yavaris - I have killed countless Yavarisi (plural? LOL). The thing is a bullet magnet on the table. It does work but always dies.

c) Squadrons and Relay... I will admit that I'm not a squadron expert. At Nats and above, I've only used YT-2400!

I'm OK with squadrons being very point efficient. The drawback is that if you lose your ships, you get TABLED! To me, it's a fair trade-off of RISK-REWARD.

Relay... it does seem reasonable that the Relay Squadron has to be within the range of the ship that is activating it. But, hey, you can kill the Relay (well, with 6 and 8 hull... you likely need 3 attacks to take them out)... heck, they are effectively escorts! Using three squadrons to take one out leaves you open to counterattacks... Oh wait, your controlling ship is in the corner? There's no RISK of losing it and getting TABLED!

d) Flotillas

The most efficient ship in the game! The most durable/pts costed ship in the game. Requires a perfect roll of 4 red dice (1/8)*(1/8)*(1/8)*(1/8) probability at long range to kill. A large ship is not guaranteed to kill them with shooting... heck, if an ISD is shooting at my flotilla, I'm super happy!

Sure, you have Home One, H-9s, Raiders, etc to hunt flotillas... you can see from the recent Finals that Nathan's Admo was out of the game chasing a cheap flotilla. He was using 25% of his points to kill a squadron ace effectively. It's not that easy to attack an opponent's backfield.

With the prevalence of 2+3, you just don't have enough combat ships to chase down flotillas so squadrons is the most effective way of doing this.

TL; DR - Conclusion

Squadrons (most efficient) + Flotillas (most efficient)... TABLING would make it worthwhile to send a dedicated hunter in the backfield. There needs to be more RISK-REWARD in taking them.

Finally if you think this make Ram City too good... I think strong players will use flotillas as shields so they are destroying all the capital ships anyways.

I think Flotillas counting as TABLING would fix alot. Rather, I think it would make games more interesting/engaging.

Note: I like Beauty and the Beast and Disney movies...hence, the title. LOL

I hit like and then I saw shmitty hit like and I'm thinking "that dude's smug is turned up to 11 with the flotes/tabling conclusion".

For what its worth, I agree an increased risk element to the usage of flotillas would be good.

Hmmmm it shows that the meta is shifting but the best players are winning worlds.

I think flotillas counting as being tabled would rein them in to 1-2 used. Hmmm

@Madaghmire LOL - I think a lot of players are thinking this... we just don't have a blog... amirite, @shmitty

I agree, @Q-DOWg , with most of this, and think that the tabling thing would definitely be a healthy change for the game especially.

I always enjoy reading your analysis Q. Good stuff.

22 minutes ago, Q-DOWg said:

Regional Season... PT106's 2x ISD + 3 Raiders wins two Regionals. No squadrons!

Elegant weapons, for a more civilized age.

I wonder WWGD (What Will Gernes Do)?

So far the fixes have come in the form of new Waves. Nerfs have really been handled in that way.

I wonder what the unintended consequences on counting Flotillas as Squads for purposes of tabling will do to other things. That would be a pretty harsh nerf to them (quite possibly needed!)

You know what also needs a Nerf that we were all talking about but kindof forgot as our Dark Side focused on Rieekan?

MOST WANTED.

5 minutes ago, CaribbeanNinja said:

You know what also needs a Nerf that we were all talking about but kindof forgot as our Dark Side focused on Rieekan?

MOST WANTED.

This is VERY true. Something I had meant to talk about with the Regionals data, but forgot. Most Wanted is an overwhemling choice for red objectives. It was popular pre-flotilla, but is rather silly now. Simplest fix I know of is to not allow flotillas to be 'Objective Ships'. That would also impact Intel Sweep, but not in a serious way.

26 minutes ago, Q-DOWg said:

@Madaghmire LOL - I think a lot of players are thinking this... we just don't have a blog... amirite, @shmitty

No, but maybe you should!

10 minutes ago, CaribbeanNinja said:

Elegant weapons, for a more civilized age.

I wonder WWGD (What Will Gernes Do)?

So far the fixes have come in the form of new Waves. Nerfs have really been handled in that way.

I wonder what the unintended consequences on counting Flotillas as Squads for purposes of tabling will do to other things. That would be a pretty harsh nerf to them (quite possibly needed!)

You know what also needs a Nerf that we were all talking about but kindof forgot as our Dark Side focused on Rieekan?

MOST WANTED.

I think the biggest issue with Most Wanted is the ability to make your 18-23 point activation flote the target. Simple errata.

Edit: Ninja'd by shmitty. Smug factor-Twelveteen.

4 minutes ago, Madaghmire said:

Edit: Ninja'd by shmitty. Smug factor-Twelveteen.

Ya know it's sunny and warm here in the PNW, so I don't mind some shade at all...

3 minutes ago, shmitty said:

Ya know it's sunny and warm here in the PNW, so I don't mind some shade at all...

Much better than the two days where we had every season in a single day... Which included hail...

Most Wanted, Intel Sweep, and possibly Advanced Gunnery if they put a hull limit in the rules for selecting an objective ship

1 hour ago, Q-DOWg said:

@Madaghmire LOL - I think a lot of players are thinking this... we just don't have a blog... amirite, @shmitty

Some blogs wouldn't mind more authors, if your writing is looking for a home Q.

37 minutes ago, Lyraeus said:

Much better than the two days where we had every season in a single day... Which included hail...

Most Wanted, Intel Sweep, and possibly Advanced Gunnery if they put a hull limit in the rules for selecting an objective ship

Just errata so objective ships cannot be flotillas. Easy.

1 hour ago, shmitty said:

This is VERY true. Something I had meant to talk about with the Regionals data, but forgot. Most Wanted is an overwhemling choice for red objectives. It was popular pre-flotilla, but is rather silly now. Simplest fix I know of is to not allow flotillas to be 'Objective Ships'. That would also impact Intel Sweep, but not in a serious way.

No, but maybe you should!

if you make flotillas count as "squadrons", it fixes that problem as well (and buff points to 450 while you're at it)

oh and making flotillas count as squadrons also means they don't count for tabling...

6 minutes ago, Sybreed said:

if you make flotillas count as "squadrons", it fixes that problem as well (and buff points to 450 while you're at it)

Sure. But part of the reason flotillas were introduced was to give squadron heavy fleets a chance to compete activation wise. This would devestate their ability to do so, because MSU could still bring them and squadron based fleets could not.

Especially if you made their upgrades count towards the squadron budget.

5 minutes ago, Madaghmire said:

Sure. But part of the reason flotillas were introduced was to give squadron heavy fleets a chance to compete activation wise. This would devestate their ability to do so, because MSU could still bring them and squadron based fleets could not.

Especially if you made their upgrades count towards the squadron budget.

hmm a fair point. Then it becomes less elegant indeed. My thinking was that since flotillas help squad based fleets so much, their point allocation should be reflected in the squadron pool, but they still activate as ships.

For example, if you have 150 points of squadrons and field 2 flotillas with comms net, you still have 110 points for squads. Not too bad ! Just bring less aces!

I am very much not a fan of the occasional "flotillas go against squadron points" 'fix' for the same reasons as @Madaghmire provided.

Heavy squadron should be a viable archetype. Flotillas can assist with that and players shouldn't be punished for wanting to play that way (even though it makes some people cry). What we're discussing is if one particular version of that archetype is too strong, and if so, how we would go about amending that.

In the end, it's fairly masturbatory (doesn't mean it's not fun to speculate, just... our current discussion doesn't really amount to much in terms of "making a real difference"). FFG is gonna do what FFG is gonna do and they don't do things based off what randos on the internet are howling about unless it's backed up by their own data and observations.

Thanks for the notes Q, short and to the point!

1 hour ago, Snipafist said:

I am very much not a fan of the occasional "flotillas go against squadron points" 'fix' for the same reasons as @Madaghmire provided.

Heavy squadron should be a viable archetype. Flotillas can assist with that and players shouldn't be punished for wanting to play that way (even though it makes some people cry). What we're discussing is if one particular version of that archetype is too strong, and if so, how we would go about amending that.

I also don't like this proposal for the similar reasons.

I think the problem with a heavy squadron archetype is that currently it is not only a viable archetype but may be the only viable (or more precisely has a much better risk/reward ratio compared to others) archetype. My theory is that the design team was too worried about squadronless fleet dominance during first wave and buffed squadrons during the course of the next several waves too much.

7 minutes ago, pt106 said:

I also don't like this proposal for the similar reasons.

I think the problem with a heavy squadron archetype is that currently it is not only a viable archetype but may be the only viable (or more precisely has a much better risk/reward ratio compared to others) archetype. My theory is that the design team was too worried about squadronless fleet dominance during first wave and buffed squadrons during the course of the next several waves too much.

^bump

They are THE premier all-comers Tier1 list. So premier that the same archetype took 6/top8 spots at worlds, but apparently that's not a problem for some people on the forum. nope. no problem at all.

8 minutes ago, Blail Blerg said:

^bump

They are THE premier all-comers Tier1 list. So premier that the same archetype took 6/top8 spots at worlds, but apparently that's not a problem for some people on the forum. nope. no problem at all.

I don't have an issue if the same archetype does well. JJs and Brik's fleets last year were different enough that I was fine that 2 bomber lists made it to the top. But I do have an issue if the same fleet does well. Rieekan aces, whether with a Pelta, Biggs or GH, is doing too well IMO. Mothma MC30s might be a good counter to it, but the skill threshold is way to high for most players to do well with.

3 minutes ago, Undeadguy said:

I don't have an issue if the same archetype does well. JJs and Brik's fleets last year were different enough that I was fine that 2 bomber lists made it to the top. But I do have an issue if the same fleet does well. Rieekan aces, whether with a Pelta, Biggs or GH, is doing too well IMO. Mothma MC30s might be a good counter to it, but the skill threshold is way to high for most players to do well with.

I will find out just how good it is soon enough... Dorrin is going to beat my face in on vassal with Rieekan Ace Holes

Just to know. Despite weird fleets as Tokra's one how many of you end a game loosing after killing every enemy ships but flotillas? Or winning after loosing all your ships but flotillas?

I ask cause I just see it once and I am curious about it.

20 minutes ago, Blail Blerg said:

apparently that's not a problem for some people on the forum. nope. no problem at all.