I've been reading the forums a lot these past two months, keeping up on all the different trends and arguments. With all the reading I collected a "battery" of small changes that I believe would make Armada much better and more enjoyable, regardless of whether you are on the "I like armada as it is, its' fine" side of things or the "Armada is broken, we need change or its dead" side of things. These are taken from the good ideas of others, and they seem to have at least some backing in comments.

1. Flotillas do not count for tabling . This introduces a risk reward element to their use. Player who like flotillas and do not see an issue with them might enjoy the additional challenge of that risk, and those who do not like them is given a possible counterplay that does not rely on them.

2. Change to engine techs. It becomes an "exhaust to use" card that is exhausted if it overlaps a ship or obstacle during movement. This makes "ramming them to death MSU" tactics less viable, without actually changing the core mechanic. It also introduces an element of challenge in using engine techs, plan those maneuvers carefully! Also, certain ion cannon upgrades might actually start to see some use.The obstacle part might not be necessary, but would make for a consistent rule.

3. Points up to 450, squadron allotment down to 25% (for a total of 112). Less points for squadrons might encourage more generics, and will regardless reduce playing time overall. The squadron game is one many find enjoyable, and others dislike. Regardless, both sides should benefit from a decreased playing time in an armada match and more points for ships other than squadrons.

A thought on Riekan, with these changes, he himself might not need a change? The composite elements that make him so incredibly good are all adjusted slightly, might that be enough?

I like the flotillas not counting towards tabling a lot. It's simple and with flotillas already having the ramming clause (they don't cause the other ship to take damage) sets a precedent for rules not on the card somewhere so it's easy to just add to the core rules.

Engine techs being discarded if you overlap a ship or obstacle could be decent as well. It's still a solid choice but for those lists using it in a ramming list, they might reconsider if they only get to use it once before it goes away.

The squad point cost reduction isn't really something I want to do. I think with flotillas losing their ability to run and keep a player in the game, it will reduce the number of flotillas in exchange for more buffs on the ships they need to keep alive. If you have Yavaris (easy kill) and Gallant Haven as the only necessary kills to win, I'll gladly deck out two ISDs, run in and try to rip them apart.

My overall hope is to see the game turn to a 3-4 average ship activation. I like seeing the huge flagships on the table and it quickly draws spectators over when they see the giant handful of dice I'm rolling as the ISD takes out that Corvette.

Then again, I'm not the game designer. I don't know what they're long-term plans are for the game. If they do decide to errata a bunch of cards, please re-release them in updated forms. I hate having to explain to a new player that they need to print an 8 page errata sheet with all the changes to the wording on the cards. FAQ and clarifications? Great! Revisions need to be re-released. I hate "gotcha" plays when a new guy comes to the table and doesn't know his Demolisher upgrade doesn't work the same/costs more/etc.

Where I play, I only see large ships coming at me. The average number of squadrons i play against is 2. Same with Flotillas, the most I've seen on the table is 3 (2 of mine and 1 of the other) I think you have to have some flotilla, just to fill in points if you don't want to play with squadrons. None of the other ships are cheap enough.

27 minutes ago, buckero0 said:

Where I play, I only see large ships coming at me. The average number of squadrons i play against is 2. Same with Flotillas, the most I've seen on the table is 3 (2 of mine and 1 of the other) I think you have to have some flotilla, just to fill in points if you don't want to play with squadrons. None of the other ships are cheap enough.

Sounds like you have a nice local meta that you guys enjoy :-).

I agree that flotillas have a place in the game, filling in those points and helping the list as a whole out. Do you think the proposed flotilla rule would harm that too much, or be ok?

Here are my current opinions:

1. Do something about MOST WANTED. Too many people play it. I'm tired of seeing it as the Red objective.

2. Double ramming with ETs. Ever noticed how when you double ram a ship to death you say "sorry dude."? Its because its dumb

3. Ban, shred, chop up, dispose of, remove, obliterate Rieekan. I hate him. I've always hated him. I do not like how his ability impacts the strategy of the game. We'll see if FFG actually does anything. It'll probably be lighter than my suggestions.

Here's my nerf bat wish list... digging up some fossils here too.

1 - Transports do not count when establishing if an opponent has been tabled

2 - Demo can only shoot after initial move not after ET.

3 - Ramming exhausts ET

4 - Relay squadron must be in command range of activating ship to use it

5 - Allow Advanced Projectors to move a point of damage to each hull zone when taking damage from XI7

6 - Implement the passing mechanic similar to Imperial Assualt. I.E. If you have more activations than me I can elect to defer activating.

Additions I would like to see

1 - Generic ship titles for all ships, specifically for VSD and Interdictor needing some TLC.

2 - SSD... obviously... grossly out of scale... just to make me smile.

EDIT

Spelling is hard

3 hours ago, ricefrisbeetreats said:

My overall hope is to see the game turn to a 3-4 average ship activation. I like seeing the huge flagships on the table and it quickly draws spectators over when they see the giant handful of dice I'm rolling as the ISD takes out that Corvette.

The regionals data suggests that the current trend is 4-5 average ship activation. Thats not really far off here.

3 hours ago, ricefrisbeetreats said:

My overall hope is to see the game turn to a 3-4 average ship activation. I like seeing the huge flagships on the table and it quickly draws spectators over when they see the giant handful of dice I'm rolling as the ISD takes out that Corvette

I played in a small tournament this weekend and took 2 ISD 2 Flotillas and some defenders. The store we were at had FOW and AOS and some open card games playing all day. In 3 games I must have had at least 10 ppl say to me, this is sweet this is why I wana play this game or, WTF game is this I wana fly an ISD looks so cool.

The game really does sell it self when you have the show peace ships on the table(ISD, home one, liberty) anything to make them seem more viable I'm ok with.

My Nerf wish list

Flotilla table ruling is good.

ET like ppl have said before, exhaust on a bump or land on obstacle.

Demo shoots after standard movement only

squads are 25% of 400 points.

Rieekan- After ship or squad is destroyed place a counter on the ship, next time ship is dealt a damage card ship is removed. Next time squad is dealt damage squad is removed. All ships and squads with counters that are still on the table are removed at the end of turn. (rule ppl will be able to write it better this is just this is just a rough idea)
Something along those lines would work for me, as double arcing ships can still kill in one round if able making position important against him.

4 hours ago, AshesFall said:

1. Flotillas do not count for tabling . This introduces a risk reward element to their use. Player who like flotillas and do not see an issue with them might enjoy the additional challenge of that risk, and those who do not like them is given a possible counterplay that does not rely on them.

What does this point mean? If it means that if all that remains of your fleet is squadrons and/or flotillas you are tabled, then I'm in for this one.

I like point 2.

I don't understand how increasing the maximum points of a fleet reduces playing time. I have played several games with increased point limits and I don't see that they add anything to the game (at least the strategic part)....but I guess this is another discussion.

Additionally I'm quite surprised no one mentioned a rule against Commanders on flotillas (or even small ships), a practice that is quite anti-thematic (at least most of my playgroup thinks so...). Something along the line "A ship cannot be designated as the flagship for the fleet if its base cost is less than the cost of the commander" (that would be below his/her rank! ) would be fine.

And I'm afraid Rieekan would still be a problem with all the new unique squadrons available since CC.

Exhausting engine techs after collision has no effect. Discard after a collision would.

My nerfbats:

1) I would hop support having flotillas not count towards tabling. I'd have no problem with the worlds lists if all I have to do is bum rush a Yavaris and Pelta/GH. Especially if I brought intel.

2) Increase Demolisher and Rieekan's costs. Start with a 10 point increase each.

3) Adopt Imperial Assaults passing of activation. Though wait until the flotilla tabling rule has sorted out first to see if this is still needed.

I would not drop squads to 25%. That addresses nothing. Players unfamiliarity or uncertainty with squads slows play. Not squads. I spend more time watching players fidget over the maneuver tool than I ever do over squads.

51 minutes ago, Church14 said:

2) Increase Demolisher and Rieekan's costs. Start with a 10 point increase each.

Seems like overkill. I'd let the flotilla and engine tech changes go into effect before making a huge change. Demolisher as-is is great because it's a ship with almost exclusively black dice with a hard time getting into the thick of it. Changing the demolisher to making a single attack after standard movement or whatever you want to call it (not after move then engine techs move) would be more than sufficient. At 20 points for the Demolisher title, you've pretty much sent the Gladiator to the discount bin. I want to see more of them, not less.

Rieeken I'd do a wait and see. If the change to flotillas helps to make the Rieeken Ace fleet more fragile, keep him as-is. Otherwise, bump his cost a bit I guess.

Maybe it's my analytical brain ticking today, but if too many things get changed all at once, we're not going to know what actually fixed the problem.

1 minute ago, ricefrisbeetreats said:

Seems like overkill. I'd let the flotilla and engine tech changes go into effect before making a huge change. Demolisher as-is is great because it's a ship with almost exclusively black dice with a hard time getting into the thick of it. Changing the demolisher to making a single attack after standard movement or whatever you want to call it (not after move then engine techs move) would be more than sufficient. At 20 points for the Demolisher title, you've pretty much sent the Gladiator to the discount bin. I want to see more of them, not less.

Rieeken I'd do a wait and see. If the change to flotillas helps to make the Rieeken Ace fleet more fragile, keep him as-is. Otherwise, bump his cost a bit I guess.

Maybe it's my analytical brain ticking today, but if too many things get changed all at once, we're not going to know what actually fixed the problem.

I do agree that we should not do all of those at once. But Demo at 20 would still see the table

Just now, Church14 said:

I do agree that we should not do all of those at once. But Demo at 20 would still see the table

At 76-82 points? At that cost, you're looking at a lot bulkier ships. Maybe it's a meta thing, but I've never been too worried about the Demolisher. Then again, one of our better players loves running 3 VSD1s with Tarkin and a Rhymerball. It's been crazy efficient and way scarier than the Demolishers I've seen.

2 hours ago, Grey Mage said:

The regionals data suggests that the current trend is 4-5 average ship activation. Thats not really far off here.

Huge difference. 3-4 means seeing people play riskier, going down to even 2 ship fleets. Right now that's a liability. Even 3-ship fleets are hard to come by because of their lack of activations. If a 2-ship ISD list can bee-line it to the nearest big ship in hopes to end the game fast and avoid the squads and support flotillas, I'm all for it. I want to see a varied "unsolved" meta. I loved going to my first big store event and seeing no repeat lists (or even archetypes). Everyone had a different theme, ships, loadouts, etc. I want an environment where when a new player pops on and shows their list, suggestions are drop an upgrade to get one that better suits your game plan rather than drop the fleet and pick up Rieeken and corellian conflict.

I disagree with almost all of these.

1. No one is thinking about how the proposed flotilla rule effects Imperials - IMO it makes the Gozanti unusable because it is just to expensive to bring with any additional added risk. The Imperials do not have as big of an issue with Flotilla spamming because they can't get 3 for the price of their cheapest combat ship. And honestly, the cheapest combat ship you can rely on being effective and also not getting the crap kicked out of it is 56 points as opposed to 44. If flotillas can get you tabled, the number of ISD's you see will drop, not increase. Also, remember that flotillas were the hard counter introduced to offset Demolisher lists. NO ONE wants to see Imperial lists return to the formulaic Demo MSU to be effective because it is their only option.

2. This is an unintentional nerf to MC80's which don't need any more pain. They are so easy to block as large bases, and in the case of the H1 variant so slow, they would never engine techs, and never clear my blocker. CR90's abuse it to ram, and Demo abuses it for too much range. These cases need to be addressed with hurting large and medium based ships which rely on engine techs and are easier to block.

3. Points up but squad % down just messes the game up in a way no one can understand. All the point costs are geared to 1/3 squadrons. The entire game would need errata to balance it at the new point totals and to assume just arbitrarily changing it would somehow "fix" the hundreds of thousands of hours of playtesting and balancing that has gone into our current point structure is shortsighted at best.

I understand everyone has the best intentions with this kind of stuff, but seriously, at this point it is mostly just rehashing other stuff already covered in other threads and adding to the perception that these issues are bigger than they are.

Rieekan aces absolutely needs some sort of hard counter or nerf. But you can't just take a machete to the game. You have to make sure the nerf to Rieekan doesn't break another part of the game. I know so far 99% of the proposed nerfs would render my tournament list unplayable, and that is an Imperial list with an ISD, the type of list you are "supposedly" helping out with these suggestions.

30 minutes ago, ricefrisbeetreats said:

At 76-82 points? At that cost, you're looking at a lot bulkier ships. Maybe it's a meta thing, but I've never been too worried about the Demolisher. Then again, one of our better players loves running 3 VSD1s with Tarkin and a Rhymerball. It's been crazy efficient and way scarier than the Demolishers I've seen.

This is purely from my own experience and observations. Bigger picture. A stereotypical Demolisher right now is 90 points and is the single most points-efficient combat ship in the game. Only TR90s seem to sit anywhere near it. Adding 10 to that to make it 100 helps somewhat.

9 minutes ago, Church14 said:

A stereotypical Demolisher right now is 90 points and is the single most points-efficient combat ship in the game .

What metrics are you using to make this claim?

31 minutes ago, Democratus said:

What metrics are you using to make this claim?

Own experience and observations. I made that caveat beforehand. I'm sure Blail can argue for squads and others can argue other ways. My opinion is certainly not the end of the argument.

The argument amounts to: Show me a harder hitting and more effective 90 point combat ship.

40 minutes ago, BrobaFett said:

No one is thinking about how the proposed flotilla rule effects Imperials - IMO it makes the Gozanti unusable because it is just to expensive to bring with any additional added risk.

I would respectfully disagree. Most Imperial lists (especially ISD lists) would still survive in a current form. Comms Net Gozanti still provides good support to ISD for points, Supressor is still amazing, Slicer Tools are still usable. And if ISD list loses all combat ships its already in a bad spot and will likely to lose a game even if its not tabled.

42 minutes ago, BrobaFett said:

This is an unintentional nerf to MC80's which don't need any more pain.

While this is true, in my opinion this nerf is minor enough to be acceptable. I don't think that the ability to double-ram is crucial for that ship.

49 minutes ago, BrobaFett said:

Points up but squad % down just messes the game up in a way no one can understand.

And this is a fair point. I don't know if it would be a right move and what demons it may uncover. However it may be a solution to increase speed and playability of the game. I don't think something that radical would happen so this one is a moot point anyway.