9 hours ago, Darth Lupine said:

I think any house rules are an abomination and only lead to confusion when , or if, players end up going to a different location, like a tourney, and are then confronted by the actual rules.

Oh dear, looks like I'll have to do the boring, half page, off topic post after all .

One of the great things about table top games is how easy it is to modify them to suit your own personal taste. Most members of our group have been gaming for many years, and have definite preferences when it comes to game mechanics, especially the Cantankerous Old Git section . There's only a couple of guys interested in tournaments, and of course there they use the standard tournament rules.

The problems we have with the standard game are these:

1) The same person goes first every turn. Alternating Activation games have been around a long time, and our 3 preferred mechanics are an initiative based system like X-Wing and the new Runewars game, take turns to go first, or the bidding system we use for Armada. If you use any of these systems you don't need the asymmetric missions that come with the standard game - much more fun to make our own.

2) With an AA game we much prefer to allow a player to pass if his opponent has more activations remaining. This avoids the contrived "gamey" situations that occur in the standard game where the more numerous fleet has complete freedom with his last few units. If he also knows he's going first next turn it's even worse.

3) Not impressed with the standard collision rules. We don't allow deliberate ramming, if an overlap is unavoidable the incoming ship is forced to reduce speed, and/or randomly pivot 45 degrees. It also risks taking engine/steering type damage.

Games are like music, art, cars, and women - we all have our own personal tastes. Game designers are only human, and there's no such thing as the perfect game, they evolve with time.

2 hours ago, marlowc said:

We do use missions, scenarios and objectives in our games, just not the standard ones.

This could have a very significant impact on the game and the relative power of any given upgrade. For example, Sato isn't going to get a whole lot out of playing Close Range Intel Scan if he is building his fleet to throw black dice at long range.

2 hours ago, marlowc said:

Oh dear, looks like I'll have to do the boring, half page, off topic post after all .

One of the great things about table top games is how easy it is to modify them to suit your own personal taste. Most members of our group have been gaming for many years, and have definite preferences when it comes to game mechanics, especially the Cantankerous Old Git section . There's only a couple of guys interested in tournaments, and of course there they use the standard tournament rules.

The problems we have with the standard game are these:

1) The same person goes first every turn. Alternating Activation games have been around a long time, and our 3 preferred mechanics are an initiative based system like X-Wing and the new Runewars game, take turns to go first, or the bidding system we use for Armada. If you use any of these systems you don't need the asymmetric missions that come with the standard game - much more fun to make our own.

2) With an AA game we much prefer to allow a player to pass if his opponent has more activations remaining. This avoids the contrived "gamey" situations that occur in the standard game where the more numerous fleet has complete freedom with his last few units. If he also knows he's going first next turn it's even worse.

3) Not impressed with the standard collision rules. We don't allow deliberate ramming, if an overlap is unavoidable the incoming ship is forced to reduce speed, and/or randomly pivot 45 degrees. It also risks taking engine/steering type damage.

Games are like music, art, cars, and women - we all have our own personal tastes. Game designers are only human, and there's no such thing as the perfect game, they evolve with time.

Oh dear, it seems I'll have to post an answer.....lol.

i fall in the Cantankerous Old Git segment (I'm 51. Totally stealing that phrase, btw.)

Ive been playing wargames since the Avalon Hill days. Of course you can house rule whatever you want to house rule inside your gaming group. It's your game and your time, after all. I mostly play in and for tournaments, so that also colors my perspective.

But the question asked was basically, 'hey, what do you think about our house rule?' And so I answered. The point could be made that since I dislike house rules I should've just not answered.....but hey, Internetz!! Lol.

BTW, of your house rules, the one I actually like is the pass activation one. That is actually the only thing currently in the game that bugs me.

Ill now leave you to enjoy the game as you will, and more fun to you!

10 minutes ago, thecactusman17 said:

This could have a very significant impact on the game and the relative power of any given upgrade. For example, Sato isn't going to get a whole lot out of playing Close Range Intel Scan if he is building his fleet to throw black dice at long range.

Cactus, it's obvious from his post they have modified the majority of the game to suit their own preference and style within their group. As you say, this makes it difficult to assess the impact of any other given card or modification, seeing we don't know what else they have altered, and we operate in the context of the game as written. I'm not sure I'd say they're playing Armada anymore, but perhaps version .2 or something....lol.

As an example of this, when AoS came out, it was an atrocity and unplayable (still is, IMO). One of my good friends proceeded to write 47 pages of house rules to make it playable, at which point I said, dude, you can't say this is AoS....this is your game you designed, you're only using the AoS minis.

So I guess the question I have is, at which point you have house ruled a game to where it's not the original anymore? Hmm.

3 minutes ago, Darth Lupine said:

Cactus, it's obvious from his post they have modified the majority of the game to suit their own preference and style within their group. As you say, this makes it difficult to assess the impact of any other given card or modification, seeing we don't know what else they have altered, and we operate in the context of the game as written. I'm not sure I'd say they're playing Armada anymore, but perhaps version .2 or something....lol.

As an example of this, when AoS came out, it was an atrocity and unplayable (still is, IMO). One of my good friends proceeded to write 47 pages of house rules to make it playable, at which point I said, dude, you can't say this is AoS....this is your game you designed, you're only using the AoS minis.

So I guess the question I have is, at which point you have house ruled a game to where it's not the original anymore? Hmm.

I don't think it matters so long as both players are happy with it?

Had to chuckle at your friend's AoS modding - we did much the same, and still can't get a decent game out of it . I don't want to give the idea that House Ruling is the best way to go by the way, far from it. We are having a blast with Star Wars Destiny, X-Wing, and even the latest 40K straight from the box. As people have said, it's great for casual pick-up gaming if everyone is on the same song sheet.

1 hour ago, marlowc said:

I don't think it matters so long as both players are happy with it?

Had to chuckle at your friend's AoS modding - we did much the same, and still can't get a decent game out of it . I don't want to give the idea that House Ruling is the best way to go by the way, far from it. We are having a blast with Star Wars Destiny, X-Wing, and even the latest 40K straight from the box. As people have said, it's great for casual pick-up gaming if everyone is on the same song sheet.

Hehe, it was more of a rethorical question. As long as everyone is having fun, of course it doesn't matter.

I used to be an Outrider for GW way back in the day, and I played both their games from first edition. Sold everything after AoS tough. Been thinking of giving 40k another try, but can't justify the expense. Have to agree with AoS, that thing is ruined permanently. I have to say tough, GW still makes the most amazing models....

1 hour ago, Darth Lupine said:

I used to be an Outrider for GW way back in the day, and I played both their games from first edition. Sold everything after AoS tough. Been thinking of giving 40k another try, but can't justify the expense. Have to agree with AoS, that thing is ruined permanently. I have to say tough, GW still makes the most amazing models....

At the risk of being off topic, can I just heartily recommend returning to 40K, they really do seem to have got it about as good as it will ever be. Shame you didn't keep some of your old models, as you say GW is still eyewateringly expensive isn't it .

3 hours ago, marlowc said:

At the risk of being off topic, can I just heartily recommend returning to 40K, they really do seem to have got it about as good as it will ever be. Shame you didn't keep some of your old models, as you say GW is still eyewateringly expensive isn't it .

I'll consider it!

The Rebel player flying Sato in question is me!
I'v played the modded version of the rules (which I prefer) and play the game normally. This is why I believe Sato to be "overpowered" or too cheap for his cost.

1. Any ship can change its dice, making even a humble corvette A firing 3 black dice at long range is incredibly dangerous. Hammerhead at close range can fire up to 4 black dice at short range (or 6 with external launchers! with ordnance experts). Significantly increasing the damage of all ships at all ranges.
Certain ships like Neb B with Salvation and Intel officer is insanely powerful. Use a squadron token to fly an A-wing, then with concentrate fire command fire 3 black dice at long range, rolling a crit/hit on a black dice = 3 hits. And just intel their brace. They either suffer 7-12 damage or brace for one turn and have to take that again next turn.
Even firing out of its side rolling 2-3 black dice against an enemy ship sneaking into your side has a bad day.
The Frigate can easily double arc and fire 2 black dice from the front and then fire 2 black and a red and a blue out of its side (or 3 black with concentrate fire, at long range) give it ordnance experts and you are laughing.

2. You can fire any specials at long range, APTs or assault concussion missiles is sick. Even blue specials like Dodonnas pride or HK-7's.

Compare it to Ackbar where you can not double arc, and two extra red dice isn't very good. Red dice are the most unreliable dice in the game.

Sure Sato's real price is squadrons, I usually fly at least 90-130 points of squadrons every game. Throw Tycho and a Hawk and you're squadrons can always be with in one of a enemy ship, usually just have a few of A-wings as "spotters" and they can't escape the ability.

You should reliably win the squadron game anyway, X-wings are super tough. 4-5 X wings with Ten Nub and a few A-wings, Hawk you can chuck in whatever you like after that.
X-wings are tough enough to normally take at least two shots from an enemy fighter, even a Tie defender. Ensuring that even if 5 Tie defenders fly at you in one goo, the rest of your Ball has enough firepower to kill things when you shoot back.

Also with a Hammer head with Flechettes, ordnance experts staying with your fighter ball means you can reliably shut down any "heroes" that fly at you.

People struggle with using Sato effectively, just bring alot of squadrons, the extra damage output more than makes up for having one less ship. And Salvation turns into a wrecking machine.

Well that's my two cents. Even in the Normal rules with objectives, Sato is my number one choice for Commander.

If you are interested in the list I normally play with Sato. Here it is

http://armadawarlords.hivelabs.solutions/view_list.php?token=119413&key=daacc667fcbe91b519685f576aeae30a

What a weird and delightful thread.

I don't have a lot to add, other than... if you're bored and want to try new stuff, why limit yourself to tweaking existing admirals? Might as well use brand new custom ones. Plenty of interesting choices in Shipyards and KDY. They may not all be perfectly balanced, but that's the price you pay for custom content, and you've obviously already decided to cross that bridge.

I have faced him 4 times and every time he gets 1 or 2 attacks in before I kill off or lock down away from my ships all the other players fighters. I don't think he is worth the points.

With X-wings, Hawk and Tycho you're squadrons shouldn't be getting "locked down" (Tycho can't anyway). X-wings are very tough, Hell throw Jan in there or Biggs (or both) and they will last all game.
Boasted comms and A-wings should be able to activate from a long distance and then the A-wing fly's the rest. Also A-wings are great at attacking ships (especially green squadron).

You're squadron's are there mainly for spotting, so with the Hawk, if you get engaged, just fly you're X-wing in the enemy's flight path (or within one of the enemy ship), while attacking the enemy. Shoot and move or Move then shoot (at squadrons). Thus still doing damage to enemy squadrons while "spotting" for you're ships.

I've flown against Sato several times. Won every time, mostly via just blowing up the ship he was in, or just killing his fighters.

12 minutes ago, Darth Lupine said:

I've flown against Sato several times. Won every time, mostly via just blowing up the ship he was in, or just killing his fighters.

Fair enough. Well played
Though I would be interested to know how you blew up the fighters before turn 4-5. Destroying 100pts+ of fighters in 4 turns would be very impressive. Or blew up the ship Sato was on before 4-5. Unless the Rebels had him on a very flimsy ship.
Any ship with ECM or RFBD should be able last long enough to get the damage in. How do you blow up Sato's ship without taking immense damage in the first place?
Killing Sato on turn 5 or 6 is too late by then.

22 minutes ago, Sniperbon said:

Any ship with ECM or RFBD should be able last long enough to get the damage in. How do you blow up Sato's ship without taking immense damage in the first place?

4 MC30's.

3 minutes ago, Ardaedhel said:

4 MC30's.

I don't understand :S
4 MC30's vs a Sato list?
I would like to see that

18 minutes ago, Sniperbon said:

I don't understand :S
4 MC30's vs a Sato list?
I would like to see that

This is my usual tournament list, and this the baseline against which I personally evaluate all of these "broken, unbeatable" lists.

MM++ v6.0 (395/400)
==================
MC30c Torpedo Frigate (63 + 59)
+ Mon Mothma (30)
+ Lando Calrissian (4)
+ Ordnance Experts (4)
+ Assault Proton Torpedoes (5)
+ H9 Turbolasers (8)
+ Admonition (8)
MC30c Torpedo Frigate (63 + 10)
+ Skilled First Officer (1)
+ Ordnance Experts (4)
+ Assault Proton Torpedoes (5)
MC30c Torpedo Frigate (63 + 10)
+ Skilled First Officer (1)
+ Ordnance Experts (4)
+ Assault Proton Torpedoes (5)
MC30c Torpedo Frigate (63 + 10)
+ Skilled First Officer (1)
+ Ordnance Experts (4)
+ Assault Proton Torpedoes (5)
GR-75 Medium Transports (18)
GR-75 Medium Transports (18)
GR-75 Medium Transports (18)

In this matchup, you'll note that I have seven activations to your four. I outbid you and will be going first, meaning that I can delay dropping anything into long range of your ships until you have no more than one shot, and I can dictate which shot that will be. My shrimp are speed 4, meaning they can jump from outside long range to within close during that window, which obviates your long range blacks. Even should you manage to get a good black roll off with Salvation, I'll evade it with my two evades. Then, I will overwhelm both your AF2 and your Salv with blacks, likely within a turn.

None of this works if you're not using the standard rules, though. You can see how initiative bidding and activation passing both give your fleet a tremendous advantage against mine, which is why everyone here is saying our advice is useless within a custom ruleset, and that the problem is the house rules, not the admiral.

56 minutes ago, Sniperbon said:

Fair enough. Well played
Though I would be interested to know how you blew up the fighters before turn 4-5. Destroying 100pts+ of fighters in 4 turns would be very impressive. Or blew up the ship Sato was on before 4-5. Unless the Rebels had him on a very flimsy ship.
Any ship with ECM or RFBD should be able last long enough to get the damage in. How do you blow up Sato's ship without taking immense damage in the first place?
Killing Sato on turn 5 or 6 is too late by then.

Interceptors with Howl and FC. As far as blowing him up, two Glads with APT will bow up anything.

18 minutes ago, Ardaedhel said:

This is my usual tournament list, and this the baseline against which I personally evaluate all of these "broken, unbeatable" lists.

MM++ v6.0 (395/400)
==================
MC30c Torpedo Frigate (63 + 59)
+ Mon Mothma (30)
+ Lando Calrissian (4)
+ Ordnance Experts (4)
+ Assault Proton Torpedoes (5)
+ H9 Turbolasers (8)
+ Admonition (8)
MC30c Torpedo Frigate (63 + 10)
+ Skilled First Officer (1)
+ Ordnance Experts (4)
+ Assault Proton Torpedoes (5)
MC30c Torpedo Frigate (63 + 10)
+ Skilled First Officer (1)
+ Ordnance Experts (4)
+ Assault Proton Torpedoes (5)
MC30c Torpedo Frigate (63 + 10)
+ Skilled First Officer (1)
+ Ordnance Experts (4)
+ Assault Proton Torpedoes (5)
GR-75 Medium Transports (18)
GR-75 Medium Transports (18)
GR-75 Medium Transports (18)

In this matchup, you'll note that I have seven activations to your four. I outbid you and will be going first, meaning that I can delay dropping anything into long range of your ships until you have no more than one shot, and I can dictate which shot that will be. My shrimp are speed 4, meaning they can jump from outside long range to within close during that window, which obviates your long range blacks. Even should you manage to get a good black roll off with Salvation, I'll evade it with my two evades. Then, I will overwhelm both your AF2 and your Salv with blacks, likely within a turn.

None of this works if you're not using the standard rules, though. You can see how initiative bidding and activation passing both give your fleet a tremendous advantage against mine, which is why everyone here is saying our advice is useless within a custom ruleset, and that the problem is the house rules, not the admiral.

Fair enough, I do actually play "normal" games and have a high win ratio with Sato. Anyways I would put my hands up and say I would definitely lose against that list.
For the record I didn't say my Sato list was "unkillable" just giving Sato a fair hearing.
But you're list does highlight one of the reasons why I prefer to play with our pass mechanic.
In all most all Tournament games, the two most important question's is...
Who is first and who has the most activation's.
If one player has both, then they will most definitely win. And here is why.
If a player has both, then is is obvious that they will out "activate" the opponent and always have their most important ship go last/first. And there is nothing the opponent can do about this, no amount of maneuvering/setup/shooting/objectives or commands can stop someone from doing that. It is no longer a tactical choice in the game because no other choice is anywhere near as good as activating you're ship last, jumping into range. Going first, firing and then flying off.

Fair play on the list though. No offense but when I see people using Demo/ISD I MC30's with 6-8 activation lists, all I see is the exploitation of the activate mechanic in the game.

You're "tactical" skill comes from the fact that the three transports force me to activate my ships first.

If I had to try and generalize the reason your custom rules are making Sato more powerful, I would say it's probably the activation passing. See of my logic makes sense here:

Sato incentivizes you to take a large squadron component but a gunship ship build.

A large squadron component eats into your activation count.

Activation count is particularly critical in gunship lists (vice bomber lists, where it's valuable but not critical).

Passing activations virtually eliminates the inherent advantage associated with more activations.

There force, passing activations, virtually eliminates the list building disadvantage built into Sato, indirectly increasing his power.

2 minutes ago, Sniperbon said:

Fair enough, I do actually play "normal" games and have a high win ratio with Sato. Anyways I would put my hands up and say I would definitely lose against that list.
For the record I didn't say my Sato list was "unkillable" just giving Sato a fair hearing.
But you're list does highlight one of the reasons why I prefer to play with our pass mechanic.
In all most all Tournament games, the two most important question's is...
Who is first and who has the most activation's.
If one player has both, then they will most definitely win. And here is why.
If a player has both, then is is obvious that they will out "activate" the opponent and always have their most important ship go last/first. And there is nothing the opponent can do about this, no amount of maneuvering/setup/shooting/objectives or commands can stop someone from doing that. It is no longer a tactical choice in the game because no other choice is anywhere near as good as activating you're ship last, jumping into range. Going first, firing and then flying off.

Fair play on the list though. No offense but when I see people using Demo/ISD I MC30's with 6-8 activation lists, all I see is the exploitation of the activate mechanic in the game.

Yeah, and that's fair: if you don't like the activation aspect of the game, then a passing mechanic is a reasonable way to address it. You just have to go into with your eyes open to the impact that change is going to have on the rest of the game.

1 minute ago, Ardaedhel said:

If I had to try and generalize the reason your custom rules are making Sato more powerful, I would say it's probably the activation passing. See of my logic makes sense here:

Sato incentivizes you to take a large squadron component but a gunship ship build.

A large squadron component eats into your activation count.

Activation count is particularly critical in gunship lists (vice bomber lists, where it's valuable but not critical).

Passing activations virtually eliminates the inherent advantage associated with more activations.

There force, passing activations, virtually eliminates the list building disadvantage built into Sato, indirectly increasing his power.

Weirdly enough, I normally have more activation's than the imperial player (my list does change). The pass mechanic in put in for that exact reason so I can't use small ships to force an opponent to fly his large ship into my arc before its gets a go.

In a normal game my list does well unless they have 1st player and two more activation's than me.
If its only one more activation or I'm first player then it doesn't make much difference. Activation can't be exploited to such an extent that my force is always out maneuvered.

34 minutes ago, Ardaedhel said:

This is my usual tournament list, and this the baseline against which I personally evaluate all of these "broken, unbeatable" lists.

MM++ v6.0 (395/400)
==================
MC30c Torpedo Frigate (63 + 59)
+ Mon Mothma (30)
+ Lando Calrissian (4)
+ Ordnance Experts (4)
+ Assault Proton Torpedoes (5)
+ H9 Turbolasers (8)
+ Admonition (8)
MC30c Torpedo Frigate (63 + 10)
+ Skilled First Officer (1)
+ Ordnance Experts (4)
+ Assault Proton Torpedoes (5)
MC30c Torpedo Frigate (63 + 10)
+ Skilled First Officer (1)
+ Ordnance Experts (4)
+ Assault Proton Torpedoes (5)
MC30c Torpedo Frigate (63 + 10)
+ Skilled First Officer (1)
+ Ordnance Experts (4)
+ Assault Proton Torpedoes (5)
GR-75 Medium Transports (18)
GR-75 Medium Transports (18)
GR-75 Medium Transports (18)

No offence, but this is why I don't play in tournaments. If anyone came to one of our group games with this list they would suffer death by derision and scorn . But of course, each to his own, that's the joy of this hobby isn't it.