I'm right there with you @Blail Blerg .

Squadrons are an issue.

The moment they released rogues and villains I knew it'd snowball into to this unholy mess.

Intel started it.

By handing squadron lists a means to entirely bypass small fighter screens, players were forced to either bring more standards or start using aces. The Flotillas, though doing a lot of good for big ship builds, are also far too squadron biased to ignore as part of the problem. The fact that a flotilla can reach squadron 4 (in function: EH +Raymus/wolf) and can grant the ability to reroll bomber dice didn't just boost squadron lists, it made them more cost efficient than using ships. Now with tools like relay, squadrons are a nightmare.


This may have been FFG's plan, but if it is, it's a bad one.


I really do not get the attraction to squadron play in Armada.

If you want to **** about with snub fighters, why aren't you playing x-wing? The fighter models are nicer, the mechanics are just as smooth, if not smoother, the expansions are widely available on buy/sell/trade markets for next to nothing.... Was it because X-wing didn't let you shoot down star destroyers? It's not like the squadron bases or mass printed squads in Armada are something that draw spectacle, unless painted by one of the community's amazing painters.

The only reason squadron play in Armada makes any sense to me is it's the most efficient way to deliver massive damage totals, bypass the effectiveness of defenses, and compartmentalize losses into small easily maintainable chunks.

Just has me like:

Those tiny fighters blow up ships better than your big honking star destroyer too.....

As I've articulated elsewhere, I very much agree with what Blail is saying. Got a little tired of being told I was wrong and that Armada was "near perfection".

Fact is, this isn't uncommon. It's a points based game; this is common in points based games where costing algorithms are arbitrary (if even existent). The trick is how does FFG handle it moving forward? edit to add more thoughts: Like many here I was big into FOW and 40k in my past. Those games suffered many similar problems. They could be addressed by releasing a new book since it can redo an entire faction with sweeping changes. We cannot do that here- we can only pile on what exists due to the FFG business model. I look at the current state of X-Wing and it does not give me hope for Armada, but I hope the lessons learned there can apply here.

I imagine FFG have got to be taking a hard look at their game design maturity after Worlds. Armada had the issues articulated. Imperial Assault was hugely skewed towards some very same-y lists in the top 8, and a game called "X-Wing" is dominated yet again by spaceships that look like toilet seats.

FFG are good at designing the skeleton of a game. The best in the biz. Where I think FFG is lacking right now is in steering their games. On the other hand, I think all 3 of their games are being hugely successful so what do I know?

All I can say is most of the folks who might be fighting the good fight here to give reasoned argument (out of love for the game) have gotten tired of being shouted down. Most of them have just moved on to new games.

I played a huge game of Armada (900 points/side) with no upgrade cards and no unique squadrons... it was one of the most fun 6 player games I've ever played. The skeleton of this game is amazing! There is still much hope here.

12 minutes ago, Darth Sanguis said:

I really do not get the attraction to squadron play in Armada.

If you want to **** about with snub fighters, why aren't you playing x-wing? The fighter models are nicer, the mechanics are just as smooth, if not smoother, the expansions are widely available on buy/sell/trade markets for next to nothing.... Was it because X-wing didn't let you shoot down star destroyers? It's not like the squadron bases or mass printed squads in Armada are something that draw spectacle, unless painted by one of the community's amazing painters.

so, I pretty much agree with the general sentiment of Blail, but my local meta isn't infected with this Rieekan madness (we got 4 mc30s rieekkan lists instead lol)

But, what triggered Blail to make this tread?? Did I miss something?

15 minutes ago, Sybreed said:

so, I pretty much agree with the general sentiment of Blail, but my local meta isn't infected with this Rieekan madness (we got 4 mc30s rieekkan lists instead lol)

But, what triggered Blail to make this tread?? Did I miss something?

Likely the one person who stated it was all fine and the build up of being right but being ignored (I know the latter all too well and it can come to a boil after a time)

2 minutes ago, Lyraeus said:

Likely the one person who stated it was all fine and the build up of being right but being ignored (I know the latter all too well and it can come to a boil after a time)

My apologies if it was I.

I understand Blail's frustration. I am a bit frustrated too... but I also take a deep breath and remind myself:

• I derive no self esteem from Armada. Broken or not, its just a fun distraction from life
• It isn't my game to fix: It's FFGs. I am under no obligation to play it if I feel it's left me behind
• If I can clearly articulate my own issues with the game, then I've done my part
• I know FFG have an excellent design team and have faith the game can remain a blast for years to come

17 minutes ago, Truthiness said:

" The divine fallacy, or the argument from incredulity, is a species of non sequitur reasoning which goes something like this: I can't figure this out, so a god must have done it. Or, This is amazing; therefore, a god did it. Or, I can't think of any other explanation; therefore, a god did it. Or, this is just too weird; so, a god is behind it."


Directly after I said this:

32 minutes ago, Darth Sanguis said:

The only reason squadron play in Armada makes any sense to me is it's the most efficient way to deliver massive damage totals, bypass the effectiveness of defenses, and compartmentalize losses into small easily maintainable chunks.

No God, just observations.

So as politely as I can say it, sit and spin.

This subject has me in no mood to entertain haft-witted memes.

4 minutes ago, NobodyInParticular said:

My apologies if it was I.

Everyone is entitled to an opinion. As long as you take in the known facts and base it on reality then generally you will have a near opinion of most people.

To say the game is fine is an interesting concept though. The "Why?" interests me.

6 minutes ago, WWPDSteven said:

I understand Blail's frustration. I am a bit frustrated too... but I also take a deep breath and remind myself:

• I derive no self esteem from Armada. Broken or not, its just a fun distraction from life
• It isn't my game to fix: It's FFGs. I am under no obligation to play it if I feel it's left me behind
• If I can clearly articulate my own issues with the game, then I've done my part
• I know FFG have an excellent design team and have faith the game can remain a blast for years to come

I wonder if they are hiring... I would apply

If FFG is looking at "stuff", here is a list from me:

(these are things I genuinely believe would make the game more interesting)

- 1st player going last/first: It's just plain boring, requiring (relatively) little skill, and gives GREAT returns. It also effectively violates the shoot-then-move core mechanic, by letting you move in the PREVIOUS round, then shoot, without your opponent having the ability to react. This is what sparked the insane 1st player bid in the first place. And what's now (partly) forcing activation spam. Just make this illegal. Problem solved. Incidentally it makes Demo a bit weaker. Because the shoot ONCE after moving is worth 10 pts (maybe a bit more, but it's no longer OP). It will also prevent the other, soon-to-come mini-Demos (Avenger Boarding Troopers, RLB B-wings etc.). Yes, I know, I'm a genius. FFG should hire me.

- Relay having unlimited range: Make it within normal command range of the active ship. Makes Boosted Comms at thing again. Having your flotillas park in corners, then issuing relay squad commands while providing activation padding is a thing of the past. Fun while it lasted, but let's move forward.

- Flotillas being "ships" in the traditional sense: No, they are NOT. So no more flotilla objective ships (maybe Most Wanted won't be taken in 90% of all lists?), no more admiral lifeboats. No more avoiding tabling with a lifeboat relay flotilla in a corner. Search your feelings; you know this to be true.

- Stacking identical card effects: Err...no. By all means, take 2 or 3 BCCs to provide coverage and redundancy, but no more of this HIT/CRIT fishing nonsense.

- Rieekan: No more. Limit this guy to true ships (no flotillas, no squads). OK, maybe that was too much? Or maybe not - he IS currently too good to be true tho. None of the other tweaks would change that.

- ET ramming: This is lame. Turns ramming into a weapon. One that VIOLATES THE SHOOT MOVE MECHANIC. Remove it. Errata ET to read so it exhaust after overlapping a ship/obstacle (also, no double healing).

Beyond this...yes, I think there are other cards that provide more power than their cost indicates. Toryn Farr is just stupid good. Demo. Rhymer. Bloody Yavaris (at LEAST as bad as Demo - how many runs a Neb w/o Yav, or more rarely Salvation?). There are some others. Just as there are cards that are so silly...PD Reroute..wtf!? Or squadrons that are so very clearly better than others (YV-666/Aggressor vs. YT-2400). I wouldn't be against FFG addressing some of that too - but none of it REQUIRES any changes for the game to work. It just means some stuff will more or less ALWAYS be taken - other stuff close to NEVER. That's unfortunate, but the game has enough good stuff that we get SOME variety regardless.

48 minutes ago, Darth Sanguis said:

I'm right there with you @Blail Blerg .

Squadrons are an issue.

The moment they released rogues and villains I knew it'd snowball into to this unholy mess.

Intel started it.

By handing squadron lists a means to entirely bypass small fighter screens, players were forced to either bring more standards or start using aces. The Flotillas, though doing a lot of good for big ship builds, are also far too squadron biased to ignore as part of the problem. The fact that a flotilla can reach squadron 4 (in function: EH +Raymus/wolf) and can grant the ability to reroll bomber dice didn't just boost squadron lists, it made them more cost efficient than using ships. Now with tools like relay, squadrons are a nightmare.


This may have been FFG's plan, but if it is, it's a bad one.


I really do not get the attraction to squadron play in Armada.

If you want to **** about with snub fighters, why aren't you playing x-wing? The fighter models are nicer, the mechanics are just as smooth, if not smoother, the expansions are widely available on buy/sell/trade markets for next to nothing.... Was it because X-wing didn't let you shoot down star destroyers? It's not like the squadron bases or mass printed squads in Armada are something that draw spectacle, unless painted by one of the community's amazing painters.

The only reason squadron play in Armada makes any sense to me is it's the most efficient way to deliver massive damage totals, bypass the effectiveness of defenses, and compartmentalize losses into small easily maintainable chunks.

Just has me like:

Armada would be very, very dull wo squadrons.

It would be just as dull WITH squadrons...if they were ineffective.

So I pretty much disagree with all of this.

Except: INTEL. That one was badly handled. If Intel allowed movement of own squads, rather than making enemy squads heavy, you could still screen. But that was probably ruled out by rebel squads (B-wing, looking at you here) being so slow they would be very disadvantaged.

2 minutes ago, Lyraeus said:

Everyone is entitled to an opinion. As long as you take in the known facts and base it on reality then generally you will have a near opinion of most people.

To say the game is fine is an interesting concept though. The "Why?" interests me.

Well truth be told I didn't say it was 'fine', as I am too far out on the outskirts to know exactly what was happening at the center of activity. I merely pointed out that without the 'pressure' of knowing what everybody else is flying the game has seemed balanced to me, and that thus one should consider that perhaps the 'metas' of tournaments and the fleets used to prepare for them are biased, in a way. So I don't believe that things that seem OP actually are in most cases of casual play, and that thus a blanket statement to that fact is a bit inappropriate. . . if I was the one who sparked this thread, then I must have been misunderstood or perhaps haven't expressed myself quite well.

I don't know what the situation is in anyone else's area, but since it's fine here, with no 'auto-win lists', no meta, really, since we always try something different, I like to point out that when people are angry about a specific aspect of the game being OP they should take a breath and consider the ramifications of their demands for nerfs or erratas on players who have never heard of Rieekan Aces, for example, or for whom Demo isn't an auto-include. That's not to say that they don't have a point, but that they shouldn't assume their issue is universal and hence requires a universal and permanent fix.

8 minutes ago, Darth Sanguis said:

" The divine fallacy, or the argument from incredulity, is a species of non sequitur reasoning which goes something like this: I can't figure this out, so a god must have done it. Or, This is amazing; therefore, a god did it. Or, I can't think of any other explanation; therefore, a god did it. Or, this is just too weird; so, a god is behind it."


Directly after I said this:

No God, just observations.

So as politely as I can say it, sit and spin.

This subject has me in no mood to entertain haft-witted memes.

That's what I get for being in a rush and trying to be light-hearted. The bottom sentence is what I'm getting at. You were directly attacking the motivations of those that want to play this game using massed squadrons because you don't want to play that way. That doesn't make it an invalid way to play. Stop telling people to go play X-Wing. I played mass squadrons for a long time and thoroughly enjoyed it. It felt like Star Wars. And before you go calling me biased the other way, I've been playing ship heavy of late and doing perfectly well. I don't feel disadvantaged in the slightest. I've played and beaten Ace Holes while going squadron light. As I've said, it needs some toning down, but I'm confident FFG will do what needs to be done.

I know it is an unpopular opinion, but I still don't see a need for a Nerf or other rules change, beyond additional counters in future waves.

I still think this is just the first time the latest "super list" didn't get played out and countered by worlds. As evidenced by the many "I don't see it locally." statements.

7 minutes ago, Green Knight said:

If FFG is looking at "stuff", here is a list from me:

(these are things I genuinely believe would make the game more interesting)

- 1st player going last/first: It's just plain boring, requiring (relatively) little skill, and gives GREAT returns. It also effectively violates the shoot-then-move core mechanic, by letting you move in the PREVIOUS round, then shoot, without your opponent having the ability to react. This is what sparked the insane 1st player bid in the first place. And what's now (partly) forcing activation spam. Just make this illegal. Problem solved. Incidentally it makes Demo a bit weaker. Because the shoot ONCE after moving is worth 10 pts (maybe a bit more, but it's no longer OP). It will also prevent the other, soon-to-come mini-Demos (Avenger Boarding Troopers, RLB B-wings etc.). Yes, I know, I'm a genius. FFG should hire me.

- Relay having unlimited range: Make it within normal command range of the active ship. Makes Boosted Comms at thing again. Having your flotillas park in corners, then issuing relay squad commands while providing activation padding is a thing of the past. Fun while it lasted, but let's move forward.

- Flotillas being "ships" in the traditional sense: No, they are NOT. So no more flotilla objective ships (maybe Most Wanted won't be taken in 90% of all lists?), no more admiral lifeboats. No more avoiding tabling with a lifeboat relay flotilla in a corner. Search your feelings; you know this to be true.

- Stacking identical card effects: Err...no. By all means, take 2 or 3 BCCs to provide coverage and redundancy, but no more of this HIT/CRIT fishing nonsense.

- Rieekan: No more. Limit this guy to true ships (no flotillas, no squads). OK, maybe that was too much? Or maybe not - he IS currently too good to be true tho. None of the other tweaks would change that.

Beyond this...yes, I think there are other cards that provide more power than their cost indicates. Toryn Farr is just stupid good. Demo. Rhymer. Bloody Yavaris (at LEAST as bad as Demo - how many runs a Neb w/o Yav, or more rarely Salvation?). There are some others. Just as there are cards that are so silly...PD Reroute..wtf!? Or squadrons that are so very clearly better than others (YV-666/Aggressor vs. YT-2400). I wouldn't be against FFG addressing some of that too - but none of it REQUIRES any changes for the game to work. It just means some stuff will more or less ALWAYS be taken - other stuff close to NEVER. That's unfortunate, but the game has enough good stuff that we get SOME variety regardless.

QFT!

On a more serious note, forgot this one:

- ET ramming: This is lame. Turns ramming into a weapon. One that VIOLATES THE SHOOT MOVE MECHANIC. Remove it. Errata ET to read so it exhaust after overlapping a ship/obstacle (also, no double healing).

It was probably me.

Blail, my friend,

I don't disagree with your conclusions. You were correct. A 134 point 2x BCC pelta-yavaris Norra Bees! spam list took worlds.

Oh wait. Only a couple of those things I guess?

All kidding aside, for serious now:

Yes, I am troubled by worlds. But not because I hate the squadron play, which I actually love and have loved since Wave 1 (and to those of you who say "If you love squadrons so much, why not play XWing?" Guys, do you even XWing? The reason I play armada is so that I don't just have 3-5 single ships that I'm pushing around the table.)

My concern is with the lack of list diversity and the clear viability of the Rieekan/Flotilla/Relay combos. It's become too synergistic. "All too easy" as our favorite sith lord would say. (Of course, it wasn't easy, and neither is this list to play, I'm sure.)

A significant portion of good players brought this archetype because they thought it was objectively the best they could have. Other good players brought different things, but this one came out on top.

That, to me, is not an indictment of fighters, bomber control center, the number 134, yavaris, flotillas, Rieekan, or anything else, but rather the simple fact that somewhere there is an imbalance. Imperials need their Strikes Back, for example. Big ships need a way to shine. There needs to be some counterplay.

Rebels need some sort of downside to bringing this out, because its high reward with little risk. That's not a good thing for the game.

But at the end of the day I love squadrons, I love star wars, and I love armada, so i'm gonna keep playing and keep thinking up ways to try and make the game better.

In the mean time:

1 hour ago, WuFame said:

Eh. Personally I think you should definitely re-evaluate something if it's showing up in a lot of lists. Like... An overwhelming number of Imperial lists. I'd extend this to Yavaris as well, whose primary weakness, that it had to be in the middle of the fight while being extremely fragile, has now been curtailed by the existence of Relay. There may only need to be minor changes to these titles as a result, and I trust FFG to sort it out effectively.

And just another comment. We have to, as a community, stop countering "This should be balanced" with "But it's counterable". Something being counterable is good, but it's not the sole requirement to write off balancing something. The game would be extremely terrible if it was just List X vs Counter to List X.

It's not completely related to your post, moodswing, it's just a common comment I've been hearing and it's driving me nuts.

You are absolutely correct, I should not have said counterable. I should have used a better term like "Can be dealt with".

One if the reasons I think I don't see many issues with demo is because there aren't many played in my area. Not anymore than h9 admo or raymus yavaris. There are things that fleets are built around, usually single ships, sometimes a combo with a particular commander. Rieekan aceholes took this idea and gave it meth then set it loose in an orphanage. In other words, it's become a full fledged problem to be delt with.

14 minutes ago, Truthiness said:

That's what I get for being in a rush and trying to be light-hearted. The bottom sentence is what I'm getting at. You were directly attacking the motivations of those that want to play this game using massed squadrons because you don't want to play that way. That doesn't make it an invalid way to play. Stop telling people to go play X-Wing. I played mass squadrons for a long time and thoroughly enjoyed it. It felt like Star Wars. And before you go calling me biased the other way, I've been playing ship heavy of late and doing perfectly well. I don't feel disadvantaged in the slightest. I've played and beaten Ace Holes while going squadron light. As I've said, it needs some toning down, but I'm confident FFG will do what needs to be done.

Sorry, I'm not trying to be pissy, and I shouldn't make my statements so sharp, it's not you or even the folks that play squadron lists I'm mad at. Misdirected anger. But I am beyond annoyed with how relevant squadrons are. I'm not saying it's an invalid way to play, I'm saying it's become the MOST valid way to play, and that's what I'm hating... why bother buying a $60 ISD model if I can't use it because $25-$30 worth or 100 points of snub fighters can turn it inside out... And I didn't mean to imply people interested in squads should play X-wing instead, I just genuinely don't understand if squadron play is what draws you, why are you playing armada, X-wing really does snub fighters better?

9 minutes ago, Green Knight said:

- 1st player going last/first: It's just plain boring, requiring (relatively) little skill, and gives GREAT returns. It also effectively violates the shoot-then-move core mechanic, by letting you move in the PREVIOUS round, then shoot, without your opponent having the ability to react. This is what sparked the insane 1st player bid in the first place. And what's now (partly) forcing activation spam. Just make this illegal. Problem solved. Incidentally it makes Demo a bit weaker. Because the shoot ONCE after moving is worth 10 pts (maybe a bit more, but it's no longer OP). It will also prevent the other, soon-to-come mini-Demos (Avenger Boarding Troopers, RLB B-wings etc.). Yes, I know, I'm a genius. FFG should hire me.

This would ruin the ability for weaker ships that rely on that trap. The Hammerheads for instance could be like that and the MC30 is definitely in that category.

16 minutes ago, Green Knight said:

- Stacking identical card effects: Err...no. By all means, take 2 or 3 BCCs to provide coverage and redundancy, but no more of this HIT/CRIT fishing nonsense.

Ehhh, multiple rerolls can be had elsewhere, or will be added in the future.

Personally, I expect them to release a FAQ that has an Eratta to what Flotillas are.

1 minute ago, Darth Sanguis said:

I just genuinely don't understand if squadron play is what draws you, why are you playing armada, X-wing really does snub fighters better?

I don't want just fighter on fighter, I want carrier / battleship fighter action.

Think less dogfighting, more Midway .

4 minutes ago, Green Knight said:

QFT!

On a more serious note, forgot this one:

- ET ramming: This is lame. Turns ramming into a weapon. One that VIOLATES THE SHOOT MOVE MECHANIC. Remove it. Errata ET to read so it exhaust after overlapping a ship/obstacle (also, no double healing).

I get that you are just kinda wish listing everything about the game you don't like, but not everyone shares that opinion. Including FFG, based on the existing RAW.

You are entitled to your opinions, but it is just that. From my point of view, FFG created a great game, that just requires steady additions.

And the Jedi are evil.

5 minutes ago, Darth Sanguis said:

Sorry, I'm not trying to be pissy, and I shouldn't make my statements so sharp, it's not you or even the folks that play squadron lists I'm mad at. Misdirected anger. But I am beyond annoyed with how relevant squadrons are. I'm not saying it's an invalid way to play, I'm saying it's become the MOST valid way to play, and that's what I'm hating... why bother buying a $60 ISD model if I can't use it because $25-$30 worth or 100 points of snub fighters can turn it inside out... And I didn't mean to imply people interested in squads should play X-wing instead, I just genuinely don't understand if squadron play is what draws you, why are you playing armada, X-wing really does snub fighters better?

And see now this, this is a legitimate complaint. At least until you went back to the xwing well. Thats a poison well. Stay out of that well.

2 minutes ago, Eggzavier said:

I don't want just fighter on fighter, I want carrier / battleship fighter action.

Think less dogfighting, more Midway .

Yup. I am an Admiral at heart. I want the whole experience at times and when I don't I don't play them. As sad as it is to say, it comes down to getting better as a player and not forcing your expectations onto your opponents.

Now having said this, I still have a Vassal game against a Rieekan Ace Holes that went to worlds.... and I am doing it with an experimental, no squadron list... This will be exciting

6 hours ago, Norsehound said:

We brought up this list type in the Utah regionals when Mythics brought it to play, and it felt like the community was shooting our concerns down as a fringe thing. Well, here it is, top of Worlds. We knew it was going to happen and the only competitive solution against it is to either not play, or take a list just like it.

I'm sorely missing the relevance of Imperial gun vessels. If Empire wants maximum damage, a player takes Demolisher. For more, they'll turn to Rhymer and load up on Bombers. This isn't what I imagined the Imperial navy to be; I thought it would be maximum turbolaser punishment fired out of space mountains and being impervious to squadrons. Our TIEs would be enough to keep the rebels busy while we blew away their capital ships with Star Destroyer Batteries. Now thanks to Intel and Yavaris, our TIEs are nothing and so apparently are our shields. Why buy anything other than carrier ISDs when you can cram in more flotillas into a list with more hard-to-kill fighters and flotillas for more activations? Imperial heavies are so out-attrited now that it's not worth the bother except to activate squads for alpha strikes. Soon, Quasar Fires with their magical fighter 4 rating will come along and probably undercut the utility of the ISD and VSD so you can take... more flotillas! Or APT Raiders! Or Arquitens so you can dispense with your flying targets we call Star Destroyers. And thanks to Relay you don't have to be anywhere near your fighters to ride them to Rhymerball dominance.

Still... even if the future is fighters, at least Sloane and the Quasar might give some better alternatives for the Empire to use down the line. Something like our own Yavaris, perhaps? At least the Empire is given an enticing reason to run something other than max Rhymerball bombers. I wish the solution could be beating fighter lists with a capital ship instead of joining them, but here we are. Let's see what Sloane and friends can do to the meta against Rieekan and friends. Maybe it's time for TIE Swarms to legitimately threaten capital ships and punish aces.

Norsehound you have been watching way too many Imperial propaganda vids