Ok, to each his own I guess.

But try to remember what the game was like BEFORE flotillas.

It was not better.

It was a lot worse.

A 15-minute perusal of the rules of American Football shows that offensive lineman should be bigger and more bulky than running backs. Teams that exploit this obvious and unbalancing rule of thumb are not engaging in the sort of contest where speed and agility are paramount. Therefore we should all agree that offensive lineman should all weigh no more than our running backs. Anyone who doesn't agree with this is a person who only cares about winning at all costs and should feel bad.

10 minutes ago, AdmiralYor said:

This is a correct statement to create fun, healthy local metas. However with as few Armada games as most metas get in, you practice to win. Is this toxic to new players in smaller metas? Yep. And we have all paid the price for that.

At the end of the day making Armada a "fun", "interactive", and "popular" game falls on FFG, not the players. The support just hasn't really been there. The quarterly kits are kinda.. lackluster. I would argue that the height of popularity for Armada was probably the Massing tournaments, which involved prize support to the tune of $100 MSRP?

I am of the opinion that it is important to not create a toxic environment, for a leisure activity that eats up an entire day of your life (like a tournament). Competition should not change that. Competition brings out the true self. What you run when the results matters is what says the most about what kind of example you want to set for the community.

Playing to win should be tempered by an internal code of conduct that prevents doing things like what I am arguing against that would create such a toxic environment.

It is a game, be good at it, practice at it, but do not seek out the extreme weak points of the rules so you can have an easier time beating your "friend," whose right to a fair and enjoyable use of his limited free time you don't mind ignoring.

I could quote everyone, but...

Iirc, flotillas were created to allow for more activations and allow bigger ships (ISDs and MC80s) to see the table, lest we just get DeMSU spam. The game has always been about activations, and people have been exploiting them since wave 1.

The H9s thing statement on my end comes from being Rebel only, and those are pretty much stapled to Admo for me. I don't think they come with an opportunity cost, though, as you're locking down a token on a lot of ships that don't want something locked down. ECMs are a common staple on larges because of H9s.

Plus H9s aren't JUST to kill flotillas, but with Jonus and glad-2s.... I mean, I know I love having an accuracy when I roll 3-4 black dice, when I'm rolling against flotillas or Demo or an ISD, whatever. One accuracy is GREAT. Two at long range to blap a flotilla is hilarious.

I'll agree about Home One, but I do love that ship. I think a lot of the frustration in this thread is a combination of:

1) flotilla spam in the 2+3 or the 1+4

2) combined with relay allowing those ships to skirt the edges and still contribute without being "near" the battle.

Also, not trying to disagree but trying to understand, people don't like h9s? Someone explain why to me please. Demo can't take them, but they're pretty great on a lot of ships...

2 minutes ago, RobertK said:

A 15-minute perusal of the rules of American Football shows that offensive lineman should be bigger and more bulky than running backs. Teams that exploit this obvious and unbalancing rule of thumb are not engaging in the sort of contest where speed and agility are paramount. Therefore we should all agree that offensive lineman should all weigh no more than our running backs. Anyone who doesn't agree with this is a person who only cares about winning at all costs and should feel bad.

Physical sport = physical aspects.

Mental Sport = mental aspects.

It's rather quickly become THAT thread again.

@xanderf, I think I started a thread about this some time ago in the off topic area.... Never did play test it.

Personally I just don't see what all this cringe over flotillas and activation padding is. We've all seen it, but I'm not impressed. I rather enjoy playing against people who run empty activations, it means 30-40% of their play time is empty. I'm still a firm believer that quality overpowers quantity.

*shrugs*

@Space_Cowboy17I understand where you're coming from, but you're asking competitive players to choose to not use extremely efficient little buggers when they are totally legal.

Why is this even an argument? Wasn't the last major tournament - Gen Con - won with a 2- or 3-ship list?

Personally I consider a choice to bring a flotilla purely for an activation as a similar choice about bidding for 1st or 2nd. Yes, there's an advantage, but you're also giving something up to get there. You are giving up additional upgrade or squadron options to get them to use the advantage. I think the 2+3 meta is vulnerable, especially on the Rebel side. I built one list specifically to counter it, and at least one other person @moodswing5537 has had luck with a similar concept in competitive play. But it uses things I haven't flown often, so I'm not going to take it to a regional tournament. Instead, I'll take a fleet that doesn't follow the 2-3 paradigm and is still quite good without being intended as a counter.

The meta changes in one of two ways: the rules change via an expansion or an FAQ or a flaw is revealed in the popular meta. We're just a couple weeks away from one of those factors coming into the equation, so let's see what happens.

7 hours ago, Green Knight said:

In wave 2, using raiders as activation padding to setup last/first with Demo was equally lame.

I agree, all tournaments people won that way should be rescinded retroactively, and we should consider the runners up to have won.

2 minutes ago, Madaghmire said:

I agree, all tournaments people won that way should be rescinded retroactively, and we should consider the runners up to have won.

(Checks to see if I would have won any tournaments this way....)

I fully support this idea! It's the only fair way that I can get justice! I mean, uh, that WE THE PEOPLE can get it. Yes, that'll do.

20 minutes ago, Darth Sanguis said:

It's rather quickly become THAT thread again.

This thread has been cheekier and more friendly than that thread, though.

28 minutes ago, Space_Cowboy17 said:

Physical sport = physical aspects.

Mental Sport = mental aspects.

I'm just poking at you a little bit. But note that I did not mix my metaphor. I made an, admittedly, silly judgment of a physical aspect of a physical sport.

Where I think your proposition is a bit presumptuous is that you are making a judgement on how someone else might enjoy the game. That's a matter of taste rather than a matter of objective value.

The simple fact that there is an activation or last/first related thread like this with such frequency should point to the fact that is if not an actual issue, at least perceived as a major issue.

Win at all cost is a recipe for a dwindling community dominated by the elitists that play the game at the very edges of its design space. New players and people wanting to try their hand at tournaments will not want to come back when they are continually shown that in order to play the game "right," they must take a lot of empty activations. Who knows how many players we have lost to this as we watch people's disapointment when they learn that their Duel ISD list while impressive to look at, is super hard to play well, while their buddy with the same experience level is winning bunches of games because he is easy moding it with 6 activations.

We the experienced players, who understand the game and want to see it grow and not diminish should recognize this and act/play accordingly.

I am not advocating any formal changes right now, we must wait and see what Wave 7 holds, and I firmly believe that FFG does try and respond to the meta, but the lead time on such things is very long and they probably are working a wave or 2 in advance so it is hard to retroactively readjust things, without throwing out all your play testing for the next wave or 2.

What I am asking for in the meantime is restraint on the part of the community, for the good of the community. Respect the person/people you play against enough to not abuse the admitted weakpoints of the game system, and expect them to respond in kind. This is the way a civil society regulates itself, rather than this survival of the fittest/those who can read forums and count well attitude. This is not war, it is not, business, it is a leisure activity so we can afford to be civil, and those you engage in it with are worthy of this kind of respect, even if there is $20 worth of ebayable goodies on the line...

4 minutes ago, Space_Cowboy17 said:

Who knows how many players we have lost to this as we watch people's disapointment when they learn that their Duel ISD list while impressive to look at, is super hard to play well, while their buddy with the same experience level is winning bunches of games because he is easy moding it with 6 activations.

But even without activations, Duel ISDs SHOULD be difficult to play. You have the strongest ship in the game, and you cant have it be easy mode to spam them.

Is his buddy winning games because he has 6 activations or because he has 6 GOOD activations and knows how to use them well? Is he spamming flotillas or is he protecting himself from that 2 ISD list by not wandering into range of them? There's a lot of factors you're kinda glossing over

3 minutes ago, Space_Cowboy17 said:

What I am asking for in the meantime is restraint on the part of the community, for the good of the community.

What you're asking for is that other people agree to play Armada the way you like it.

Nobody seems to dispute the fact that activation advantage is disproportionately rewarded by the rules as written. I'm not sure why you keep insisting on it.

The only point of contention is your assertion that everyone would be better off if, rather than honoring the implicit agreement to play by FFG's rules, they all agreed to play by your house rules.

Your house rules may or may not be better than FFG's (I won't get dragged into it) but, as long as FFG is still actively supporting this game, you just can't seriously expect that players worldwide will simply accept to play by any other rules than theirs.

Way down the line, once the game becomes effectively defunct, there'll be plenty of room to start a community-run rules revision, new peer-reviewed expansions, etc. But not now.

Ya know, I'll push back and agree with @Space_Cowboy17, to an extent. I have typically tried to buck the design trend (usually about one game after I've played the flavor of the month). I'm not a particularly strong player, but I'm still looking for the answer to high activation count fleets that use lots of flotillas. I wouldn't go so far as to demand that everyone must give up their flotilla-spamming ways, and I don't think @Space_Cowboy17 is really doing that either. He's just asking us to think about it. Fine with me. In fact, I've never even once run a list that doesn't conform to his house rule suggestion. The game is still fun.

Nor is there any apparent endpoint for stirring up communal judgment against players who give themselves the best chance of winning by playing efficient ships and lists. Even if everyone simultaneously agreed to run no more flotillas than actual ships, what's next? Should players stop running points-efficient ships because you want to be able to be competitive with your Combat Interdictor/Tagge list? Should everyone take at least one NK-7 for each Leading Shots in order to be considered a gentleman?

I'll start by saying that I agree activation advantage is an issue, that much seems obvious at this point. The more I consider it, I think Flotillas not counting for tabling really is the right solution.

That being said, I want to address the growing criticism of how the community presents itself. FFG already has a pretty good approach to this. I personally don't play my top tier lists against newer players. In fact, I don't play the top tier lists unless I'm at a Regional (or higher) tournament or playing with someone specifically to prep for that type of tournament. League nights and regular store tournaments are for playing the "civil" lists. When I'm going to a higher level tournament, I expect to face everyone at their best.

14 minutes ago, Helias de Nappo said:

Should everyone take at least one NK-7 for each Leading Shots in order to be considered a gentleman?

The gauntlet is thrown then, sir! I accept your challenge!

To Armada Warlords to re-write all my lists!

I think that whatever you perceive as a problem should be defined better to be able to say something about what should be done.

For example, a first player ISD + 2 gozantis vs. 2 ISDs should go like this:

========

[Round of first engagement begins]

1. Gozanti activates

2. ISD#1 shoots ISD at long range with 4 reds and maneuvers into medium range

3. Gozanti activates

4. ISD#2 shoots ISD at long range with 4 reds and maneuvers into medium range

5. ISD shoots ISD at medium range with 4 reds and 4 blues and maneuvers into short range

[Round over. On to next round.]

6. ISD shoots ISD at short range with 4 reds and 4 blues and maneuvers out of short range

7&8. ISDs shoot at ISD from side-arcs with 4 reds and 2 blues

========

In that example the first player achieved a total of 16 dice in shots vs. the second player only 14 with a 166 points fleet vs. a 240 points fleet.

Questions:

- Should having the activation advantage and possessing the first player mean such an edge in fights? Especially when the first player is secretly bid for?

- Does it make sense for the double the strength fleet do worse? Is it fun being the second player, knowing you will not get full front arc shots?

- Why should having extra flotillas translate into an advantage in a fight that is taking place elsewhere?

- Is only the first player combined with more activations problematic?

1 hour ago, dfg said:

I think that whatever you perceive as a problem should be defined better to be able to say something about what should be done.

For example, a first player ISD + 2 gozantis vs. 2 ISDs should go like this:

========

[Round of first engagement begins]

1. Gozanti activates

2. ISD#1 shoots ISD at long range with 4 reds and maneuvers into medium range

3. Gozanti activates

4. ISD#2 shoots ISD at long range with 4 reds and maneuvers into medium range

5. ISD shoots ISD at medium range with 4 reds and 4 blues and maneuvers into short range

[Round over. On to next round.]

6. ISD shoots ISD at short range with 4 reds and 4 blues and maneuvers out of short range

7&8. ISDs shoot at ISD from side-arcs with 4 reds and 2 blues

========

In that example the first player achieved a total of 16 dice in shots vs. the second player only 14 with a 166 points fleet vs. a 240 points fleet.

Questions:

- Should having the activation advantage and possessing the first player mean such an edge in fights? Especially when the first player is secretly bid for?

- Does it make sense for the double the strength fleet do worse? Is it fun being the second player, knowing you will not get full front arc shots?

- Why should having extra flotillas translate into an advantage in a fight that is taking place elsewhere?

- Is only the first player combined with more activations problematic?

Your example is missing a few things like commands. Not to mention that the ISDs are going to block the one with gozantis.

7 minutes ago, TallGiraffe said:

Your example is missing a few things like commands. Not to mention that the ISDs are going to block the one with gozantis.

A second example:

An ISD is chasing another at long range and neither is doing any turning. If the first player is chasing his ISD can make long range shots. But if the second player is chasing he never gets to shoot.

Anything off in that?

11 hours ago, ovinomanc3r said:

This effectively swap command 1 ships for activation padding to command 3 ships for activation padding.

Winners: VSD and Whales.

Nope. Close but nope.

Guess what the most efficient ships are for command value?

Yup. Flotillas.

You are suggesting we change pure ship activation padding for command activation padding. Its the same ships which are best for both. It literally changes nothing.

This isnt a comment on whether something is needed or not, i stay out of those, its just a comment highlighting how straightforward it is to game this system to.

10 minutes ago, Ginkapo said:

Nope. Close but nope.

Guess what the most efficient ships are for command value?

Yup. Flotillas.

You are suggesting we change pure ship activation padding for command activation padding. Its the same ships which are best for both. It literally changes nothing.

This isnt a comment on whether something is needed or not, i stay out of those, its just a comment highlighting how straightforward it is to game this system to.

The change is lowest cost per ship to lowest cost per command value. VSDs and flotillas win. I knew that.

Yeah VSD-Is are 24 against 23 of gozantis but they also add firepower. It will depend on the squadron build I guess. As long as flotillas cannot be flagship builds will include a VSD surely.

3 hours ago, dfg said:

I think that whatever you perceive as a problem should be defined better to be able to say something about what should be done.

For example, a first player ISD + 2 gozantis vs. 2 ISDs should go like this:

========

[Round of first engagement begins]

1. Gozanti activates

2. ISD#1 shoots ISD at long range with 4 reds and maneuvers into medium range

3. Gozanti activates

4. ISD#2 shoots ISD at long range with 4 reds and maneuvers into medium range

5. ISD shoots ISD at medium range with 4 reds and 4 blues and maneuvers into short range

[Round over. On to next round.]

6. ISD shoots ISD at short range with 4 reds and 4 blues and maneuvers out of short range

7&8. ISDs shoot at ISD from side-arcs with 4 reds and 2 blues

========

In that example the first player achieved a total of 16 dice in shots vs. the second player only 14 with a 166 points fleet vs. a 240 points fleet.

Questions:

- Should having the activation advantage and possessing the first player mean such an edge in fights? Especially when the first player is secretly bid for?

- Does it make sense for the double the strength fleet do worse? Is it fun being the second player, knowing you will not get full front arc shots?

- Why should having extra flotillas translate into an advantage in a fight that is taking place elsewhere?

- Is only the first player combined with more activations problematic?

Right. And per the OP suggestion, how this changes is:

========

[Round of first engagement begins]

1. Gozanti activates

2. Gozanti activates

3. ISD shoots ISD at long range with 4 reds and maneuvers into medium range

4. ISD#1 shoots ISD at medium range with 4 reds and 4 blues and maneuvers into short range

5. ISD#2 shoots ISD at medium range with 4 reds and 4 blues and maneuvers into short range

[Round over. On to next round.]

6. ISD shoots ISD at short range with 4 reds and 4 blues and maneuvers out of short range

7&8. ISDs shoot at ISD from side-arcs with 4 reds and 2 blues

========

So it changes to the first player only getting off 12 dice vs 22 dice for player 2...but at a 166 pt fleet vs a 240 pt fleet (notably 1 "combat ship" vs 2 "combat ships"), that's probably the expected result, the one should do much better.