Just now, geek19 said:

So if I get a friend to jump you in the parking garage and steal your stuff, then that's a good alliance, right?

(KIDDING, SO MUCH KIDDING!)

This cracks me so much.? Might need a big friend though or a couple guys, or a gun. I am a big loud boisterous guy!?

Just now, Brikhause said:

This cracks me so much.? Might need a big friend though or a couple guys, or a gun. I am a big loud boisterous guy!?

14 minutes ago, geek19 said:

So if I get a friend to jump you in the parking garage and steal your stuff, then that's a good alliance, right?

(KIDDING, SO MUCH KIDDING!)

You might be surprised how many times this has been suggested as a way to deal with him...

20 minutes ago, Ardaedhel said:

You might be surprised how many times this has been suggested as a way to deal with him...

Yeah I got friends in low places! ?

2 hours ago, Brikhause said:

This cracks me so much.? Might need a big friend though or a couple guys, or a gun. I am a big loud boisterous guy!?

Nah, just take him out to breakfast before the tourney and slip a little hot sauce in his cereal... ? that’s the most assured way

9 hours ago, geek19 said:

Go for his knees. He will fall quick

It has been my opinion from it's inception that Relay should NOT convey any special rules/abilities that are linked to the ship that is issuing the squadron command. My reasoning is that it allows a player to bypass the traditional limitation imposed on carriers by limiting their squadron activation range. The reason we have squadron activation ranges in the first place was to prevent a carrier from flying off into the sunset ( thereby absolving the player of actually having to take the time to fly it well and protect it) and still getting to activate squadrons. Carriers should also have to risk coming into range in order to be part of the battle, if they don't have to it invalidates one of the natural counters to a carrier list, which is to kill the carrier... If this was not an important design concern in the original game, then why include squadron activation range at all in the first place?

Relay is a tool used to sell Flotillas... and we can keep it around despite my intense hate for flotillas (again, an easy button way to cheaply pad activations instead of having to make hard choices about which actual combat ships to move.) But since Relay NULLIFIED one of the key weaknesses of carriers, the trade off SHOULD BE that you do not also gain the powerful buffs a dedicated carrier can have. As it stands, Relay is a clear work around to the initial design limitation of squadron activation ranges. It was a good idea at game creation, why mess with it? Unless you want to make sure you sell a crap ton of Flotillas, which you were going to any way because activation advantage makes you a better player (sarcastic look)...

We all know that the Relay can be targeted and that these squadrons cost points, but as most Acehole players and Imperial Jendon players will attest, the cost is a small price to pay in order to project a carrier's abilities far beyond what that ship (Yavaris) was ever intended to when it was initially point costed.

Also, at it's inception, Yavaris was very powerful, that power was greatly offset by the difficulty and foresight required to set up the double tap since the squadrons had to be in position a turn earlier. FCT allows a squadron to change its location on the game board, to a simple layman that sir, is a move, you can rules lawyer all you want but the fact is that you reach down, pick up the squadron, and place it in a new location... which is how you move stuff. You can syntax it all you want, but the intent of the original Yavaris title's limitation was to prevent exactly what is being done right now with FCT. Why are we ok with that? Now that the upgrade cards in the game have changed to technically get around this limitation, Yavaris needs to be changed to reflect its original intent of requiring a squadron to be in position a turn early to use, or it needs to be much more expensive.

Also, Strategic is being used to "double tap" an objective by "ending a movement," in range of a token with FCT. How can you both get credit for moving, in order to use strategic, and yet not count as having moved, for the purpose of Yavaris's basically now non-existant limitation?

Either FCT causes you to move or it does not, having it both ways, while technically completely legal based on the wording or "ending movement," vs "perform an move," feels much like rules manipulation and a depth of rules laywering that has driven me and many others away from X-Wing. Do we really want Armada to go down that convoluted and dark path too?

I personally refuse to use Yavaris in my bomber wings specifically because of how the games evolution has drastically changed the effect of the title. Yavaris is no point costed/worded properly for the current state of the game.

10 minutes ago, Space_Cowboy17 said:

Also, Strategic is being used to "double tap" an objective by "ending a movement," in range of a token with FCT. How can you both get credit for moving, in order to use strategic, and yet not count as having moved, for the purpose of Yavaris's basically now non-existant limitation?

Either FCT causes you to move or it does not, having it both ways, while technically completely legal based on the wording or "ending movement," vs "perform an move," feels much like rules manipulation and a depth of rules laywering that has driven me and many others away from X-Wing. Do we really want Armada to go down that convoluted and dark path too?

I personally refuse to use Yavaris in my bomber wings specifically because of how the games evolution has drastically changed the effect of the title. Yavaris is no point costed/worded properly for the current state of the game.

You argue from a little point of misconception there, my friend. And yes, it is all about timing - but not about timing of the Move as such.

FCT does cause you to move. This is not a dispute. You move. Unlike being placed, you move.

What it doesn't cause you to do is activate.

Yavaris' restriction is Movement on that Squadron activation.

And clearly, if you think that's a convoluted argument, well, let me introduce you to the Rules Sub Forum with the best of Humour Because its there, my friend...

The problem with rules is we try to have the same wording mean the same things to different things...

So it does have to be precise.

In this instance, what is our alternative? I believe our alternative makes things more fiddly and difficult.

If the restriction on Yavaris was moving at all during that turn, that would also nullify Adar Tallon, and would require a new set of token trackings to note who has moved without being activated. Because we can't take notes or just be expected to "remember" things...

Might it make more sense to have relay only work if you could have activated the relay ship itself? Use it as an actual relay between your carrier and the target fighter? That way you can still use it to extend your squadron control range, but your carrier still needs to be kinda close to the action? You're still safe but could feasibly be jumped on?

Our space radios can only go X distance, except when VCXs are on the receiving end, then they can go all the distances.

I just laugh at the fact that @Ardaedhel thought he was getting away from @Brikhause by moving to the great northwest.....and @Brikhause follows him not 4 months later. LOL! (they are of course good friends)

@Drasnighta

I know it all "works," as per the wording. I am not disputing that it is technically legal. I am making the point that when a Title is designed to be really strong but balanced out by a clear restriction, and then the difficulty of that restriction is trivialized by later releases, the Title has effectively lost its large downside, making it appropriate to reevaluate that title.

I think we see that causing many of the powerful titles to emerge as auto, or at least aught to takes.

Examples of Titles that have been turned up to 11 be later releases include: Avenger (BT's), Yavaris (FC and FCT), Gallent Haven (CC/Rebel Squadrons 2, more unique and powerful squadrons with loads of Brace tokens),

Also, I find it difficult to take someone seriously when then reach down, pick up their squadron, MOVE it distance one toward me, and then say, "Well I didn't move, so I qualify to use Yavaris to shoot you twice with this squadron." Call it what you will, it is exactly the situation the person who originally designed and point costed Yavaris with wanted to insure did not happen otherwise they would not have bothered including such a restriction on a card that would be overtly OP otherwise, yet here we are doing it to each other with a straight face, acting as if the physical act of re-positioning a squadron simply did not happen.

I refuse to use Yavaris with a FCT because I feel it violates the original intent and designed downside of the card. I cannot live with myself or look my opponent in the eye as I "move but not move," my squadrons. The Title should require a commander to plan such a powerful ability a turn in advance without the benefit of a mid-turn readjustment. This also allows the opponent an opportunity to more easily counter the abiliety. Having this opportunity to react is key to a more skill based, less list build centric game, where players shine, not the upgrades they take. That would justify how overtly powerful Yavaris is, as it is, we are using cards to reduce the skill and increase the reliability of a combo that was intended to be very difficult to manifest.

We disagree on original design intent.

I see the point of Yavaris is to trade a move action for a shot.

Because of that, other forms of movement are not s violation of design intent.

So if FFG comes out with a super FCT that lets you move your full distance you think that would be ok and that we should all just suck it up and accept that Yavaris can go off against a target distance 6 away...

The issue is that with the added movement in the same turn, immidiaetly prior to the shot, the opponent's ability to react to the threat is much less than it was when the card was point costed and created.

When Yavaris was created, this threat of mid-turn re-positioning (lowering the skill barrier for proper use, and upping the skill required to effectively aviod this ability) did not exist. Do you not think it is reasonable in response to the changed difficulty of blocking the combo, coupled with the increased ease of manifesting the combo, not to mention the myriad of ways to get a squad token round after round, to bump this up to a Squad 3 ship, does not warrant a reevaluation? Surely all those benefits can not simply be over looked, or justified by a miniscule investment of an additional 3-6 points depending on if you include FC, as well as the laughable opportunity cost, on a ship that otherwise, does not use those slots typically.

Sure. But that’s a silly hypothetical. You might as well argue demolisher isn’t powerful because FFG could release a generic title for any ship that lets it shoot twice after moving..,,

Yavaris is that Yavaris is until it is changed.

Heres the thing:

I make the assumption that neither of us is James Kniffen.

I know I am not.

I assume you are not, either. (If you are, we have other things to discuss).

zbecsuse neither of us are James Kniffen, we are unable to definitively state the mind of the Yavaris Designer. It’s only conjecture to us.

Yavaris forms a block to design, for sure - as things need to be designed around it. I believe 100% that this is the reason VCXs are relay 1, not 2.

But FFG will design around Yavaris as Yavaris is...

I mean, my thought ultimately comes down to... if you don’t Trust FFG designers to take Yavarisbinto account as it designs forward... how can you trust them to Nerf it appropriately beforehand?

10 minutes ago, Drasnighta said:

I assume you are not, either. (If you are, we have other things to discuss).

Sound like a personal problem... haha. I really hope I get to cross paths with the infamous Dras one of these days. You remind me of one of my really snarky and intellectual friends from High School.

34 minutes ago, Space_Cowboy17 said:

The issue is that with the added movement in the same turn, immidiaetly prior to the shot, the opponent's ability to react to the threat is much less than it was when the card was point costed and created.

FCT only triggers if the b-wings (or whatever squadron) being moved aren't engaged. So long as you have some TIEs to throw at my squads and engage them, that's still counterable.

I'll also point out that a Yavaris nerf has been discussed before, but as I pointed out then, there were more MC80s than Yavaris uses the last wave of Regionals. Do we need to nerf MC80s because of their presence? And before the inevitable counter of "Yavaris is much easier to use" not really. With PRACTICE, Yavaris is much easier to use. But engaging the squadrons and/or killing Yavaris isn't impossible. Look at the numerous threads complaining of the bad Nebulon side shields.

11 minutes ago, Parkdaddy said:

Sound like a personal problem... haha. I really hope I get to cross paths with the infamous Dras one of these days. You remind me of one of my really snarky and intellectual friends from High School.

I fully admit, my online persona is more of my core arsehole personality showing... but face to face, I’m considered a nice guy...

Gabes greater internet d***wad theory, I guess

19 minutes ago, geek19 said:

FCT only triggers if the b-wings (or whatever squadron) being moved aren't engaged. So long as you have some TIEs to throw at my squads and engage them, that's still counterable.

I'll also point out that a Yavaris nerf has been discussed before, but as I pointed out then, there were more MC80s than Yavaris uses the last wave of Regionals. Do we need to nerf MC80s because of their presence? And before the inevitable counter of "Yavaris is much easier to use" not really. With PRACTICE, Yavaris is much easier to use. But engaging the squadrons and/or killing Yavaris isn't impossible. Look at the numerous threads complaining of the bad Nebulon side shields.

We all know that FCT is blocked by engagement. That does not invalidate the point that previously, no movement was possible and now a speed 1 move is technically possible, effectively doubling the range of the double tap threat. The fact that you can produce a counter that has always existed, does nothing to disprove the point that the potential threat range is doubled on a very powerful title for the massive investment of 3 points. FCT is fine, but the interaction with Yavaris warrants further study.

You also point out that with practice it is much easier to use. That has no bearing on the point either. Player skill has not consideration in game balance, you have to assume a highly competent player is commanding both fleets. A mirrored contest between functionally the same person. Is the best test bed of balance.

In that scenario, can a person (like yourself) get more out of a Yavaris with FC/FCT or without. And when the other you across the table has to face that threat, is it easier or harder for you to counter a stock Yavaris or a FC/FCT Yavaris?

Then we must ask ourselves, is the difference in effectiveness we should all recognize in this comparison worth 3 fleet points or do we need to examine how FCT and Yavaris interact because the points investment no longer reflects the effect these cards can have on the board state?

I want to reiterate, "outplay the abusive combo," is never the answer to how to balance a game, because you must assume a mirrored set of opponent. Player skill can therefore be removed as a factor so that the only variables left are finite gameplay mechanics. Telling people to "Get Gud," is never an acceptable solution to an OP combo. Many things in games can feel dauntingly powerful to a new player, and we are not trying to balance the game for the new players, the most balanced game in the world (chess as an example) can feel overwhelming for a new player against an old veteran. Balance is aimed at insuring that the highest level players all have equal chances at victory, without having to resort to running the same builds.

@Space_Cowboy17 has an important point, and it's something that's been alluded to before. Yavaris and Gallant Haven by themselves aren't the problem. The problem is the set of incremental changes that have arrived in subsequent releases. Biggs. Jan Ors. Fighter Coordination Team. Relay. Of course, Biggs doesn't enter into @Brikhause's version of the list, but he still uses damage mitigation. The point is that new capabilities continue to enhance the power of the Yavaris/Gallant Haven combination that many great players are already familiar with.

For myself, I still think the answer is Sloane Phantoms.

Phantoms are too expensive for their hull and they dont get swarm rerolls.

Also, while i agree there is a bit of power creep, I dont see it for Yavaris. The neb is fragile so i dont feel a problem here as you can one shot it with something as small as a raider if you got expanded racks and 2 accuracies.

Cloak needs to be changed to grant personal intel and they would be worth it.

16 minutes ago, Space_Cowboy17 said:

Cloak needs to be changed to grant personal intel and they would be worth it.

Or if cloak obstructed shots from squadrons. That would ease their hp problem.

20 minutes ago, Space_Cowboy17 said:

Cloak needs to be changed to grant personal intel and they would be worth it.

Something like “If you do not attack this round, gain cloak”

Cloak- you may move up to your maximum speed, even if you are engaged. You do not engage enemy squadrons. Cloak is broken upon attacking enemy squadrons”

46 minutes ago, MandalorianMoose said:

Something like “If you do not attack this round, gain cloak”

Cloak- you may move up to your maximum speed, even if you are engaged. You do not engage enemy squadrons. Cloak is broken upon attacking enemy squadrons”

Well you need to be able to be engaged. Not being able to engage someone until they throw 8 red dice at your ships sounds like trouble. But I like the first part of that where if you dont attack you can move your squads normal movement even if engaged. However they need to be able to at least engage you so if you do attack you would have to attack their squads and not their ships if they are in range. That means they are afforded an opportunity to defend before their ships are attacked, even if they have to chase you everywhere to do it.