2 minutes ago, PT106 said:

This is one way of doing it, another way is a requirement for relaying squadron to be in range of the ship. I personally prefer "Flotilla can't relay" solution, but now we're talking potential fixes with each one having its own pros and cons.

Yes a distance 1-5 requirement would require the flotilla's to be near the action, instead of scooting of into the distance.

I have in another thread suggested that Flotillas can't activate before a non-flotilla ship, unless its within distance 1-5 of a non-flotilla ship or that there are no non-flotilla ships left to activate. this forces the owner to keep his flotillas near the action or spend +36 points on a corvette to fly away with them.

But it seems, now that I think of it, a bit complicated.

your 3rd change I think is just a complicated Pass Rule. A straight Pass rule would work easier. This would also make your 1st rule redundant. Who cares how many Flotillas you have I can wait.

I don't see your second rule as a problem in the game as there are many ways to counter that problem IMO

the other problem that has come up with Relay and Flotillas. I think the bigger problem is the number 2 that comes after Relay. but I could just be a biased Rebel player. I wouldn't mind seeing a upgrade card to block Relay in the future or maybe a Squadron that could counter it that would be relay fun

I want the rules to be simple. Both list building requirements suggested put the responsibility of list composition requirements on the shoulders of the tournament organizer. I don't care for that.

The flotillas having the rule that says they aren't counted when checking for tabling is a simple fix that's been suggested often and doesn't need to get discussed here. It's something that could be added to the game rules, causes no invalidation of all but the craziest (all Gozantis) lists.

When suggesting rules changes, the less disruptive they are to ease of gameplay the better.

On 1.10.2017 at 0:03 PM, Kiwi Rat said:

Okay here we go again, with suggesting rule changes to Armada, the first two is to List building, the last is about activation order (Talk about beating a dead horse )

1: Only up to half of the ships in a list may be flotilla = if you want three flotilla's in a list, you have to have three other non-flotilla ships in your list.

2: Only up to half of the squads in a list may be unique = if you want three unique squads in a list, you have to have three other non-unique squads in your list.

3: Second player may in the beginning of each turn, declare that his last activation must be activated last in the turn = I.e second player has two ship list VS a five ship list and in the beginning of say turn two, he/she declares to have "last activation" meaning that first player will activate one ship, second player will activate one ship, first player activate his/her remaining ships, second player activate his/her last ship.

In regard to the third suggestion, it is a bit of a double edge sword, because if the second player gets it wrong by declaring "last activation", he/she might end up having one or more ships shooting at his/her non-activated ship to pieces before it gets activated, so it would just generate some more excited or different play as the second player would/could get a hard choice to make, in the beginning of each turn.

Anyhow, bark at me for being mad or applaud me for suggesting something new and bold.

And if anyone of you have a much better suggestion than the above, then I would be listening

I would just ask: why? And to what end? How will this make Armada a much better game?

35 minutes ago, Green Knight said:

I would just ask: why? And to what end? How will this make Armada a much better game?

Having played a narrative game with a ship that was required to go last on the opposing team, I can attest that it encourages smarter play by the first player and is very powerful.

As for the other issues, I'm not against limiting flotilla presence or unique squadrons. Both are intended to make the game note accessible to new players. Also, frankly, flotillas need a slightly more effective nerf. The existing restriction didn't particularly change their most detrimental effect on the game, which is to perversely elongate it to maximum rounds without a strong individual primary effect on the game. If it weren't for the utter dominance of high efficiency bomber wings, flotillas would rule the roost as the most broken element t of the game.

2 hours ago, thecactusman17 said:

Having played a narrative game with a ship that was required to go last on the opposing team, I can attest that it encourages smarter play by the first player and is very powerful.

As for the other issues, I'm not against limiting flotilla presence or unique squadrons. Both are intended to make the game note accessible to new players. Also, frankly, flotillas need a slightly more effective nerf. The existing restriction didn't particularly change their most detrimental effect on the game, which is to perversely elongate it to maximum rounds without a strong individual primary effect on the game. If it weren't for the utter dominance of high efficiency bomber wings, flotillas would rule the roost as the most broken element t of the game.

But if flotillas are to be nerfed, they must do something more than just changing the interaction with Relay.

Relay, with unlimited range, can be considered a flaw - or a feature - depending on how you look at the 15+ point investment you must make (our of the 134 squadron pool).

But just "fixing" relay will still let flotillas do the Boosted comms thing, which was definitely a thing before RELAY.

And even that won't address flotillas as pure activation spam. If anything it would encourage even more super-pickle builds of the no-to-low squad type.

Here is what I think about this whole topic:

These types of discussions don't do anything for the community, but I do suppose it is about that time for the flotilla debate to come back around.

At the end of the day, we have no control over the tournament structure. If you house rule it, go nuts. But you can't convince FFG to adopt these rules, so the entire discussion is pointless, unless you're looking for input on your own version of rules.

On 10/1/2017 at 6:03 AM, Kiwi Rat said:

Okay here we go again, with suggesting rule changes to Armada, the first two is to List building, the last is about activation order (Talk about beating a dead horse )

1: Only up to half of the ships in a list may be flotilla = if you want three flotilla's in a list, you have to have three other non-flotilla ships in your list.

2: Only up to half of the squads in a list may be unique = if you want three unique squads in a list, you have to have three other non-unique squads in your list.

3: Second player may in the beginning of each turn, declare that his last activation must be activated last in the turn = I.e second player has two ship list VS a five ship list and in the beginning of say turn two, he/she declares to have "last activation" meaning that first player will activate one ship, second player will activate one ship, first player activate his/her remaining ships, second player activate his/her last ship.

In regard to the third suggestion, it is a bit of a double edge sword, because if the second player gets it wrong by declaring "last activation", he/she might end up having one or more ships shooting at his/her non-activated ship to pieces before it gets activated, so it would just generate some more excited or different play as the second player would/could get a hard choice to make, in the beginning of each turn.

Anyhow, bark at me for being mad or applaud me for suggesting something new and bold.

And if anyone of you have a much better suggestion than the above, then I would be listening

I don't know that I agree with any of these.

I really have a hard time understanding how Flotillas are still a topic for change. They're a support ship, but honestly, since they got Nerf'd, they're really only worth their weight. I'm not convinced spamming activations has much merit any more. It's a one trick pony, and everyone's seen the trick. Honestly, I have more success with a 2 ship pulsetap than I do activation spam...

I do kind of agree there should be a way to cap ace squadrons, at the same time, I also think the overall squadron cap should be based around the cumulative squadron value of your ships, so I'm certain my perspective on the issue is bias as ****. All that said, I really don't think there's a good method to change this without screwing over certain lists. I'd rather see it left alone.

I really don't see the need for the third either, if you're building a 2-3 ship build, you should have plan to be out-activated already. Seems kinda gimmicky to just give 2nd P last activation.


Honestly, in this meta, I'm surprised we're even seeing these threads. I'm having a hard time coming up with topics lately because I'm so brazenly content with the stability of things now. I'm trying new janky fleets and combos I "knew" wouldn't work before and it's been lively.

I dont mind the bullets heading my way for saying, again:

Change relay. There is not a single other aspect of the game, for me, that needs further changes. Yes, occasionally I was thinking to bind the number of flotillas to the number of non-flotillas, but then again, I dont really mind.

There are several numbers to improve the situation, surely, but dont let those flotillas command with total impugnity from wherever they happen to be on the board, using the same shuttle over and over and over again. Sloane just worsened this, but I dont mind Sloane herself, on the contrary.

There are far better players than me that think relay is too strong, so I feel confident that this issue is not just something that I personally cant manage. I used it myself, there is no choice than to howl with the wolves in competitive play.

28 minutes ago, NebulonB said:

I dont mind the bullets heading my way for saying, again:

Change relay. There is not a single other aspect of the game, for me, that needs further changes. Yes, occasionally I was thinking to bind the number of flotillas to the number of non-flotillas, but then again, I dont really mind.

There are several numbers to improve the situation, surely, but dont let those flotillas command with total impugnity from wherever they happen to be on the board, using the same shuttle over and over and over again. Sloane just worsened this, but I dont mind Sloane herself, on the contrary.

There are far better players than me that think relay is too strong, so I feel confident that this issue is not just something that I personally cant manage. I used it myself, there is no choice than to howl with the wolves in competitive play.

Relay is really strong.

But also very limiting.

Rebels need at least 30 pts of genetic fighters that aren't bombers.

Empire can get away with just 1 20 point ace or 15 pt generic.

But both vcx and lambdas can be shot down.

Why aren't more players trying to take out the relay squadrons?

2 minutes ago, Green Knight said:

Relay is really strong.

But also very limiting.

Rebels need at least 30 pts of genetic fighters that aren't bombers.

Empire can get away with just 1 20 point ace or 15 pt generic.

But both vcx and lambdas can be shot down.

Why aren't more players trying to take out the relay squadrons?

Who runs squads anymore?

While I unreservedly disagree with all three ideas, I appreciate you presenting them in a constructive manner, @Kiwi Rat . It's a nice break from the negativity these conversations usually open with.

1 hour ago, Ardaedhel said:

While I unreservedly disagree with all three ideas, I appreciate you presenting them in a constructive manner, @Kiwi Rat . It's a nice break from the negativity these conversations usually open with.

Thanks

Its a matter of principle for me to write in a matter, that is polite/constructive.

In the World of Tanks online game I get alot of S*** thrown at me when a team player for some reason is dissaticefied with my actions, but nothing constructive when our team loose.

So to counter act this negative garbage that sometimes gets spewed around the internet, I've started my own private crusade, by writing positively to people when they perform well, even players on the opposing team, will get a positive remark from me when they best me.

I know its a hopeless uphill battle, I'll never win, but I'm a hopeless optimist.

I can see there has been many comments on this thread, expressing different views, however reading between the lines, its quite clear that we all are quite passionate about the game Armada. So we are all alike, despite our different views.

4 hours ago, Green Knight said:

Relay is really strong.

But also very limiting.

Rebels need at least 30 pts of genetic fighters that aren't bombers.

Empire can get away with just 1 20 point ace or 15 pt generic.

But both vcx and lambdas can be shot down.

Why aren't more players trying to take out the relay squadrons?

Because both sides combine them with bricks of either ace escorts or highly maneuverable squadrons that engage and lock down enemy squadrons before they can hit or kill the relays.

It is very rare in my experience to see relays go down before the squadron game is effectively already won. They are durable and their effect is large enough to ensure they never have to be within engagement range of enemy squadrons unless they want to be. when they are in engagement range, it is relatively easy for experienced players to make them completely untouchable between escort and Intel.

6 hours ago, thecactusman17 said:

It is relatively easy for experienced players to make them completely untouchable between escort and Intel.

You don't even need escort and Intel, as such. This is partly due to the fact that their physical location is almost entirely divorced from their effect, not just on the ship-to-relay side but also on the relay-to-squadron side. The enormous effective range of distance three--substantially larger than any other squadron-based effect that I can think of--makes it pretty trivial to keep them well out of threat range if they look to be in any danger at all, even if your squadrons are completely out-maneuvered. This is such a huge gap that B-wings can shield them from Interceptors .

11 hours ago, Green Knight said:

Relay is really strong.

But also very limiting.

Rebels need at least 30 pts of genetic fighters that aren't bombers.

Empire can get away with just 1 20 point ace or 15 pt generic.

But both vcx and lambdas can be shot down.

Why aren't more players trying to take out the relay squadrons?

always value your insight and input, GK.

In this case my answer would be that you are then forced to bring lots of squads always to have a serious chance to get to the relays and kill them. No squadless lists, no swarms, you are forced to bring a certain list element always...and was that not something we never wanted?

Of course not every list should and can be an ideal matchup for any other list, but you really force people into (massive) squads if you follow what you say.

Sure, next argument is, kill the flotillas. I might have better targets than to fly to corners to get scattered (we know we can set up to counter that), but ok, point taken. What if the commands come from the ISD? So I can attack the critical target right away, and the battle carrie probably has to start using other commands...whoops, in come the flotillas in the corners, taking over.

If the relay argument is not strong enough by itself, I could connect it to the flotillas and their inherent advantages...as we so often see on top tables. 1 and 1 is 3, then, and thats just too much. But as I said, flotillas per se I dont want to attack, they give list variety.

I see what you are doing here and I don't think flotillas are really that big of a problem in the game. They make the activation economy aspect of the game playable even with big ships. Yes, I think the presence of flotillas makes bigger ships more viable. But a couple of flotillas aren't free. I wouldn't pay 50 points for a initiative bid, but that is the price of 2 flotillas. Also When they first came out the flotilla spam was a problem. But I don't think they are any more. Sure Demolisher struggles to kill them, but isn't a weakness for Demolisher over all good for the game. killing flotillas is funny, because, sometimes it is incredibly hard but other times it is really easy. This variety seems good for the game IMO. Some people may complain about the flotillas that just fly away from battle. Well a CR90 is just as hard if not harder to catch and kill. And if you can't put your Admiral on them then all they can do from a distance is use relay to command fighters. So kill the shuttle. Nothing shuts a list that spent a lot of points on fighters and flotillas down (that will rely on relay) like killing the shuttle. The flotillas are out of position, the fighters can't be activated.

As for the unique fighter nerfs, I would have agreed with you just a few months ago. Then I began started to figure out how to fly a good sloane fleet. I had visions of something like 14 activations of TIE Fighters. I would let quantity be my quality. But as I played I noticed a few things. For the points Unique squadrons were just too good of an investment to pass up. I was a little disappointed that I couldn't fly my huge TIE swarm, until I realized how much fun unique squadrons are to fly. My Imperial Aces list is so much more fun to fly than my TIE Swarm was. And I bet it was more fun to play against. Moving all those squadrons really takes up time, especially in a tournament. So I just don't see the fact that unique squadrons being good (better than the same number of points of generic) is bad for the game.

In short, flotillas are good, unique squadrons are good. But that does not mean the game is less fun. I would argue (with the elimination of lifeboats) that both of these elements being good actually makes the game good. I don't see any reason to nerf them.

46 minutes ago, NebulonB said:

always value your insight and input, GK.

In this case my answer would be that you are then forced to bring lots of squads always to have a serious chance to get to the relays and kill them. No squadless lists, no swarms, you are forced to bring a certain list element always...and was that not something we never wanted?

Of course not every list should and can be an ideal matchup for any other list, but you really force people into (massive) squads if you follow what you say.

Sure, next argument is, kill the flotillas. I might have better targets than to fly to corners to get scattered (we know we can set up to counter that), but ok, point taken. What if the commands come from the ISD? So I can attack the critical target right away, and the battle carrie probably has to start using other commands...whoops, in come the flotillas in the corners, taking over.

If the relay argument is not strong enough by itself, I could connect it to the flotillas and their inherent advantages...as we so often see on top tables. 1 and 1 is 3, then, and thats just too much. But as I said, flotillas per se I dont want to attack, they give list variety.

I can easily agree with at least some of this.

I just think that just going after relay won't fix the perceived flotilla issues, as it only touches upon part of the 'problem'.

as I said, flotillas per se I dont mind. Keep them as they are. Fix relays specific connection to flotillas (not remove relay entirely).

If you dont fix soon, power is piling and piling. Flotillas and relay...problematic. Add Sloane...even stronger. Add the next hot Admiral/Officer/whatever...you see where I am going ?

Just now, NebulonB said:

If you dont fix soon, power is piling and piling. Flotillas and relay...problematic. Add Sloane...even stronger. Add the next hot Admiral/Officer/whatever...you see where I am going ?

No, I don't.

Because the situation hasn't really changed since Before + After Sloane in that department.

6 minutes ago, NebulonB said:

as I said, flotillas per se I dont mind. Keep them as they are. Fix relays specific connection to flotillas (not remove relay entirely).

If you dont fix soon, power is piling and piling. Flotillas and relay...problematic. Add Sloane...even stronger. Add the next hot Admiral/Officer/whatever...you see where I am going ?

4 minutes ago, Drasnighta said:

No, I don't.

Because the situation hasn't really changed since Before + After Sloane in that department.

I've seen a lot less use of Flotillas since the last wave dropped. Sloane, Disposable Capacitors, and Quad Battery Turrets seem to have curbed mass use of them in my area. I can't speak to the use of relay since I hardly ever see it. I'm the guy locally who abused it but have moved away from it in favor of larger, more effective Alpha Strikes. I still take Jendon a lot but that's as much for his ability than for relay, h*** I'd love for him to lose relay and gain strategic.

18 minutes ago, NebulonB said:

as I said, flotillas per se I dont mind. Keep them as they are. Fix relays specific connection to flotillas (not remove relay entirely).

If you dont fix soon, power is piling and piling. Flotillas and relay...problematic. Add Sloane...even stronger. Add the next hot Admiral/Officer/whatever...you see where I am going ?

I don't know what your meta is like, but I haven't seen a Sloane fleet that relies on flotillas and relay for fighter activations. Maybe it is just my local meta, but relay isn't that big of a deal where I am it is just too easy to just down. If it does dominate you meta Ig88 or some snipe should make short work of the shuttle and the linchpin of the whole list goes away.

You can't do mass activations with relay meaning those dangerous alpha strikes that a heavy fighter list can do don't work.

9 minutes ago, Megatronrex said:

I've seen a lot less use of Flotillas since the last wave dropped. Sloane, Disposable Capacitors, and Quad Battery Turrets seem to have curbed mass use of them in my area. I can't speak to the use of relay since I hardly ever see it. I'm the guy locally who abused it but have moved away from it in favor of larger, more effective Alpha Strikes. I still take Jendon a lot but that's as much for his ability than for relay, h*** I'd love for him to lose relay and gain strategic.

This is my experience. Flotillas exist, but they don't dominate the meta. Slona, likewise is good, but I still think over all Motti and JJ are better Admirals.

1 hour ago, Drasnighta said:

No, I don't.

Because the situation hasn't really changed since Before + After Sloane in that department.

and I do.

Now those flotilla commanded tie fighters with their blue die became even more dangerous.