Finally got another battle report to post up about gents.
http://www.thatsnomoon.info/blog/armada-griffs-gambit-vs-angry-triangles-battle-report
Finally got another battle report to post up about gents.
http://www.thatsnomoon.info/blog/armada-griffs-gambit-vs-angry-triangles-battle-report
HI Jimmy,
Finally have some time to properly ready your fantastic battle reports. I would like to thank you for them as they provide a lot of valuable information for your fellow players, especially someone like me who has not played much.
My first impression when looking at the fleets assembled is that is going to be a fight with heavy weight boxers Single ISD is a sight to behold and you had 3 in total! It was interesting to see both fleets circling around each other carefully, as if both of you tried to find that small opening for a powerful hook that would knock the opponent down.
I was no less curious to see the squadron action because you had quite a combination of ace pilots there while Todd didn't bring any. It was thus interesting to see how would you it to your advantage and how would Todd try to mitigate the effect of the squadrons on the game. I noticed you were flying your squadrons in a single group. It looks to me that the advantage of it is the ability to attack a single ship together and potentially support each other against enemy fighters. However, with no squadrons to intercept yours, is it still preferable?
Edit: I was obviously writing it while reading and I see you have already answered my question in your conclusions
It was also a good example on how to fly in formation as Todd did very well in one turn only to lose a ship and getting some damage due to crashing into each other the next turn. I am sure with a bit of more practice it is not going to happen and it just shows how easy it is to get ships into wrong spot.
Every game teaches something new so I would not be worried about less action than usual. You and Todd made certain decisions and experienced what can be the consequences and that is always better than pure theorizing. Thanks again for the great report!