16 minutes ago, Megatronrex said:

I stopped seeing large numbers of flotillas as soon as Quad Battery Turrets, Leading Shots and Gunnery team started letting me pop them two at a time from long range. Honestly since the new wave came out I haven't had nearly as many problems dealing with activation advantage.

I think this is the best way to remedy the situation - create new upgrades and ships that negate some of the advantage that flotillas bring. If someone is bringing four flotillas, that's eighty odd points that they're not spending elsewhere. Quad battery turrets and Sloane in wave 6, but equally H9s, intel officers and the like from previous waves - there are ways of killing flotillas fast (not least a good old fashioned ram - chuck in Garel's Honor and that's a laughing Hammerhead vs a sad flotilla), and that can leave your opponent high and dry.

At least with the admiral nerf, lifeboat flotillas have gone. They always sucked.

1 minute ago, ceejlekabeejle said:

I think this is the best way to remedy the situation - create new upgrades and ships that negate some of the advantage that flotillas bring . If someone is bringing four flotillas, that's eighty odd points that they're not spending elsewhere. Quad battery turrets and Sloane in wave 6, but equally H9s, intel officers and the like from previous waves - there are ways of killing flotillas fast (not least a good old fashioned ram - chuck in Garel's Honor and that's a laughing Hammerhead vs a sad flotilla), and that can leave your opponent high and dry.

At least with the admiral nerf, lifeboat flotillas have gone. They always sucked.

I'm hoping for some med/large only upgrades next wave to help make it more viable to go with more big ships and fewer activations. I'd also like to see Flagship only upgrades that scale in power to the size of the ships base.

58 minutes ago, Undeadguy said:

My point is, if you want to change how activations work, you need to change the core rules. Making a new phase would be a terrible idea. And making upgrades that pass are subject to abuse and become auto-includes since activations are so powerful. And then when you run into someone else with that upgrade, you gain no value.

FFG would need to rewrite the rules in some fashion if they thought activations were an issue for the game.

Yup, this I agree with. So good, I didn't disagree with you!

Wasnt activation advantage an issue in Super Smash Bros on the Gamecube?

DK and Samus had ridiculously super smashes, but every character had easy dodges, and for goodness sake Fox could fly! Young Links silly sword play was basically undodgable and lets not get started on Mr Game&Watch with his flipping Bacon.

The reward was always there if you could outplay your opponent, it was just easier with most other characters and their button bashing spam fleets.

Just an idea, how about setting a ratio of ships to flotillas. My suggestion is one flotilla plus one for every two ships rounded down. So 4 ships would allow 3 flotillas.

Thoughts?

24 minutes ago, Funny Defcon said:

Just an idea, how about setting a ratio of ships to flotillas. My suggestion is one flotilla plus one for every two ships rounded down. So 4 ships would allow 3 flotillas.

Thoughts?

I'm not a fan of restricting the amounts or types of ships. Once you start down that dark path, forever will it dominate your destiny.

My personal preference is to simply bring a plan to deal with something that I 100% know for sure I'm going to be facing in a game, instead of changing the rules so that other people can't bring what they like playing.

But maybe that's just me.

Again, as other have stated, large activations are part of the game.

Want to dump points into flotillas, go ahead. With the new change that Flotillas can't hold your Admiral means if you have 2 big ships and 4 flotillas for padding, guess I know where my 4 Big ships are heading. Oh, and I guess with lots of flotillas your Big ships won't likely have as many Upgrades.

But lets look at something, Ship costs (because an upgrade costs the same whether you are Imperial or Rebel)

EMPIRE (Most Expensive to Least)

ISD - 120/110

Interdictor - 93/90

Victory SD - 85/73

Gladiator 62/56

Quasar 61/54

Arquitens - 59/54

Raider 48/44

Gozanti 28/23

REBELS

MC80 Assault/Command Cruier - 114/106

MC80 Battle/Star Cruiser - 103/96

Assault Frigate - 81/72

MC30 - 69/63

Pelta - 60/56

Nebulon B - 57/51

CR90 Corvette - 44/39

Hammerhead - 41/36

GR-75 Transports - 24/18

OK, so knowing some basic costs, on a 400 point game, if the rebels had 4 Flotillas, that means anywhere from 72 - 96 points on flotillas. Imperials would be 92 - 112. That means almost 1/4 of your fleet cost is sunk into flotillas. that would leave around 300 points for other fleet assets. If one assumes to be viable one maximizes their fighter escort to the full 1/3 of their fleet for 133 points, that gives a fleet breakdown of:

400 Point Fleet

133 Squadrons

Flotillas 72 - 96 Rebels / 92 - 112 Imperials

Other Ships 195 - 171 Rebels / 175 - 155 Imperials

That really doesn't leave a lot there for ships. If the imaginary opponent had 6 activations, then (assuming rebels) the other two ships would be of avergae 90 points each, so maybe 2 assault frigates?

Now, taking lots of flotillas and not wanting low cost ships or more upgrades then means you have to sacrifice points from somewhere, and that means Squadrons need to be pruned to get more ship points. And that means you can lose the squadron game. So to counter the argument above, where someone stated "I don't have cheap things to send against his cheap things...you do. Squadrons are cheap. 3 Tie Fighters are about the same costs as 1 transport. Tie's have 1 blue anti-armament, the Transport has 1 blue anti-squadron. 3 Ties has 3 attack vs the 1 Counter. 3 Ties has 9 hull vs the 3 hull of a flotilla and 1 scatter of the flotilla. I put odds on the Squadrons to kill the flotilla.

Again, this is a numbers game, and if you want your numbers in Flotillas, then sacrifices must be made elsewhere, and if you want to still have buffed ships then you are losing the squadron part of the game, and if you as the opponent are not seeing that? Well, nothing anyone can do.

This thread should be stickied. Whenever the weekly thread about activation paddings comes up just link to here. There have been many well made and articulated points that really hit the nail on the head.

44 minutes ago, NeonKnight said:

Again, this is a numbers game, and if you want your numbers in Flotillas, then sacrifices must be made elsewhere, and if you want to still have buffed ships then you are losing the squadron part of the game, and if you as the opponent are not seeing that? Well, nothing anyone can do.

This is something I religiously preach because it is a concept that may be generally applied to many games. Every time you choose to include something, you automatically exclude another thing. When you privilege high numbers of activation, you have made a conscious choice to de-emphasise other aspects of your fleet. Building a fleet requires a player to weigh the strengths and weaknesses of each choice.

I can see the issue of gaming mentalities clashing here because if a player approaches the game with the mindset that I have described above and plays against a player who, for instance, emphasises roleplaying aspects and lore rather than a focus on fleet optimisation, then one of them will inevitably feel dissapointed with the game.

I actually use my flotillas for something usefull, than just pure activation tokens.

I slap on Comms Net or Boosted Comms, nothing big, something in the region of 2-6 points of upgrades, I find not having any upgrades on flotilla silly.

Flotillas are supposed to support the fleet, not be poorly armed empty convoy ships shielded by bigger ships.

A simple rule on top of the not being allowed to carrier a Fleet commander, is to say that a Flotilla must have at least one upgrade card costing 2 points or more. = Suddenly 8 points extra of forced upgrades on four flotillas, might mean the difference of winning the first player bid or not.

I run a single flotilla for my Vic fleet at the minute, that has a comms net on it. Has three purposes, 1.) pass tokens to the Victory's and pootle along the back. 2.) Pootle along the back and get me a mini alpha strike with Ciena and Valen using relay or use relay to abuse tokens with my lamba and 3.) it takes me to five activations. In my mind, I struggle to list build with less than five activations due to being petrified of Demolisher, but the activation bonus is probably the least useful thing it does.

My current thinking (though I haven't tried it yet) is to use a Raider 1 to hunt down flotillas in those silly activation padding lists. I can sit in a corner and abuse objectives with the bulk of my fleet all day long, but the raider is fast enough to actually catch the flotillas, and at a guess, probably has a 60/70% chance of one shotting them to avoid the scatter to.

I think that the race to absurd activations and bids is starting to harm the game. I really do. And I'm saying that as a player who loves high activation, high bid fleets.

Changes I'd make:

1: Add in a pass mechanic, similar to Imperial Assault.

2: Force players to flip for initiative, and give the higher bid the option to re-flip.

Between these options, you'd have several positive changes to the game:

1. Greater incentive to design fleets for playing both first and second player
2. Reduced reliance on flotilla spam for additional activations
3. Increased numbers of non-flotilla options on the table including alternate ships, squadrons, and upgrades
4. Greater design space for large and medium ships in a variety of roles
5. Slightly increased time-to-kill for several units offensively and defensively, which allows players to engage more effectively against ships that are effectively one-shot-kill options (such as BT Avenger, H9 MC30, and Demolisher).

I'm sorry again I say no to a pass mechanic. As I said, any building for an activation advantage are high bid is making a choice for less points for fleets.

Get gud!!

And I say this as someone who would likely come in 7th in a 6 player tourney.

37 minutes ago, NeonKnight said:

I'm sorry again I say no to a pass mechanic. As I said, any building for an activation advantage are high bid is making a choice for less points for fleets.

Get gud!!

And I say this as someone who would likely come in 7th in a 6 player tourney.

In which case, why are you saying "git gud" if you aren't playing effectively? Because activation advantage with a high bid is not going to typically get last place if flown well.

5 hours ago, thecactusman17 said:

I think that the race to absurd activations and bids is starting to harm the game. I really do. And I'm saying that as a player who loves high activation, high bid fleets.

Changes I'd make:

1. Learn to run lower activation fleets.

2. Profit

If no one does different the situation won't change.

21 minutes ago, Ginkapo said:

1. Learn to run lower activation fleets.

2. Profit

If no one does different the situation won't change.

The issue is two fold:

1: I like big ships. I want to run big ships. I want to run as many big ships as possible. Ships, not squadrons, are the reason I got into this game. They are the reason i play.

2: Without an activation pool to ensure those big ships are pointed in the right general direction at the right time, they frequently are just avoided altogether. Or this happens:

4 hours ago, thecactusman17 said:

The issue is two fold:

1: I like big ships. I want to run big ships. I want to run as many big ships as possible. Ships, not squadrons, are the reason I got into this game. They are the reason i play.

2: Without an activation pool to ensure those big ships are pointed in the right general direction at the right time, they frequently are just avoided altogether. Or this happens:

This is clear canon evidence that flotillas help you win games. The Rebels had several GR-75s. The Imps had 2 ISDs. Even with mass squads, the ISDs were still destroyed.

55 minutes ago, Undeadguy said:

This is clear canon evidence that flotillas help you win games. The Rebels had several GR-75s. The Imps had 2 ISDs. Even with mass squads, the ISDs were still destroyed.

Imps just need to git gud, n00b commanders. That or Raddus is as OP as Sloane was for the first 2 days she showed up.

15 hours ago, thecactusman17 said:

I think that the race to absurd activations and bids is starting to harm the game. I really do. And I'm saying that as a player who loves high activation, high bid fleets.

Changes I'd make:

1: Add in a pass mechanic, similar to Imperial Assault.

2: Force players to flip for initiative, and give the higher bid the option to re-flip.

Between these options, you'd have several positive changes to the game:

1. Greater incentive to design fleets for playing both first and second player
2. Reduced reliance on flotilla spam for additional activations
3. Increased numbers of non-flotilla options on the table including alternate ships, squadrons, and upgrades
4. Greater design space for large and medium ships in a variety of roles
5. Slightly increased time-to-kill for several units offensively and defensively, which allows players to engage more effectively against ships that are effectively one-shot-kill options (such as BT Avenger, H9 MC30, and Demolisher).

yes, i agree to all of this. I would much prefer a roll off for first or second player than a bid system. we would have better, more tactical games if every fleet was written to be able to play as both first and second player, just let everyone build to 400 and make the strongest all around fleet they can instead of banking on going first. building fleets that require first player leads to the activation issue being even more pronounced.

FFG could/should have curbed the flotilla thin with this simple ruling. "You cannot have more flotillas in your fleet then non-flotilla ships."

it is short, clean, and addresses the problem without invalidating flotillas or adding any new mechanics.

3 minutes ago, Space_Cowboy17 said:

yes, i agree to all of this. I would much prefer a roll off for first or second player than a bid system. we would have better, more tactical games if every fleet was written to be able to play as both first and second player, just let everyone build to 400 and make the strongest all around fleet they can instead of banking on going first. building fleets that require first player leads to the activation issue being even more pronounced.

FFG could/should have curbed the flotilla thin with this simple ruling. "You cannot have more flotillas in your fleet then non-flotilla ships."

it is short, clean, and addresses the problem without invalidating flotillas or adding any new mechanics.

Whats wrong with the bid system to determine if you want to go first or not? If you want to go first, bid more. If your issue is that bidding for first means people take a bunch of activations to last/first you, either don't play into their tactics or kill their extra activations.

I made a post in the off topic board addressing what I think may be the best-case for house ruling out activation advantages.

Personally, I love the Armada system for activation, I think it's fairly intuitive for a board game.

Here's what I came up with:

"I am very curious what it would be like to run a game of Armada similar to X-Wing.

In X-Wing the Phases break down as so:

1.) Plan

• Players secretly choose maneuvers.

2.) Activation

• Each ship moves according to the chosen maneuver in order of lowest value to highest.

3.) Combat

• Each ship performs an attack in order of highest value to lowest.

4.) End Phase

• Player perform any necessary clean up.

In Armada the Phases work like this:

1.) Command

• Players secretly choose commands for their ships

2.) Ship

• Starting with player 1, players take turns activating ships.
• Ships attack then move in the same phase.

3.) Squadron

• Starting with player 1, players take turns activating remaining squadrons.

4.) Status

• Players refresh defenses and upgrade cards at this time.

My idea, is relatively simple, and should maintain all the rules already in the game. The ship phase of Armada will be broken into two sub-phases, similar to X-Wing, as so:

1.) Command

• Players secretly choose commands for their ships

2.) Ship

• Combat Phase
  -Players take turns revealing commands and performing their 2 attacks in order from lowest command value to highest
• Movement Phase
  -Players take turns moving ships from highest command value to lowest

3.) Squadron

• Starting with player 1, players take turns activating remaining squadrons.

4.) Status

• Players refresh defenses and upgrade cards at this time.

I feel this could significantly alter the way Armada is played, and while there's nothing wrong with the standing system I think it may be interesting, if not fun, to examine this game with an alternate system of activation.

-Determine Initiative & 1st/2nd player as normal
-Deploy ships/squads as normal
-Use objectives as normal
-During activation ships with tied command values will alternate activations starting with player 1 until no more ships with that command value remain.
-All ships of one command value must activate before the next highest or lowest value
-If a player has no ships of the current value being activated they cannot activate a ship of the next higher/lower value and must wait for all ships of the current value to be activated first. "

Just make it so flotillas don't count towards tabling. The more I hear, the more this solution climbs to the top. You can even bring back lifeboat flotillas then.

-You brought no flotillas? Nothing affected

-You brought lots of flotillas and a single combat ship? Better hope your turn 2-3 last-first shots count.

-You brought a balanced fleet with some squadrons, warships, and 1-2 flotillas that stick with the fleet and perform support? Well, this doesn't really affect you.

You brought 134 in squads and some combat ships? You probably only had 1 flotilla anyway and don't notice this ruling.

You brought 8 Gozantis and 134 in squads? Well, bring a Raider and have fun

EDIT: I do want to see how the no-commanders rule shakes out before more changes are made

21 minutes ago, Church14 said:

Just make it so flotillas don't count towards tabling. The more I hear, the more this solution climbs to the top. You can even bring back lifeboat flotillas then.

-You brought no flotillas? Nothing affected

-You brought lots of flotillas and a single combat ship? Better hope your turn 2-3 last-first shots count.

-You brought a balanced fleet with some squadrons, warships, and 1-2 flotillas that stick with the fleet and perform support? Well, this doesn't really affect you.

You brought 134 in squads and some combat ships? You probably only had 1 flotilla anyway and don't notice this ruling.

You brought 8 Gozantis and 134 in squads? Well, bring a Raider and have fun

EDIT: I do want to see how the no-commanders rule shakes out before more changes are made

Love this, have for some time. I think this would have been a better fix than no-lifeboats. Then again, no lifeboats was fantastic and really mixed up list building, but I still like this better.

@geek19. the bid system makes it possible to create lists that depend on first activation, I hate this type of list because it is not a well rounded fleet that could stand up against other fleets if it had to go second. These fleets are usually super frustrating to play against if you are going second because they always skirt out of danger with their first activation. however, if these fleets get out bid and don't get first activation they usually fold.

High activation count/ abuse of the activation system, goes hand in hand with this type of list. Because of how powerful the First/Last situation is. If a player knew going in to a match that they would have a 50% chance of going first, they would rethink this approach, resulting in people playing lists that do not rely on last/first.

Last/First is an unfortunate and glaring problem with the current system that allows a ship that in actual ship to ship combat would have no hope of slipping in under the guns of an entire fleet, deliver their salvos, and they escaping without taking any return fire to perform this nonsensical maneuver. It is a shortcoming of the activation system that detracts heavily from the realism of the game for the sake of a game mechanic.

I like armada as it is, but it could be much better and more realistic if Last/first "magic invulnerable ships," did not exist.

Best way to do that is to play with equal activations. Next best way to do that is to make it hard to predict who will get first turn. third best way is to limit throw away activations that intentionally abuse the shortcoming of the activation system.