1 hour ago, kmanweiss said:

I'd love to see some statistics for X-wing regionals that show numbers and types of ships.

Try this site: http://meta-wing.com/

5 minutes ago, Green Knight said:

I hear this claim that Armada can be won by 'any' fleet. But is that really true?

Assuming equal skill, how many fleet archetypes are really competitive? Are there just a few, or very many?

What does the winning lists have in common? What are the differences?

If assuming unequal skill, then Armada is a game canny old hand can make a good number of fleet archetypes and walk all over a newbie, but that's hardly relevant in this context.

I Thnk the answer to this is “there’s enough”. As long as you can point to 5-6 archetypes that are evenly split among the factions that continuously place at the top tables then its enough to make a game feel balanced even though that all Arq list will fail miserably against and equally skilled opponent. It’s also important that nothing feels like it has to be taken. Which so far FFG has done well and corrected when it come up in the past. Demo and Major Rhymer toed very close to the auto include which is bad for game diversity.

Diversity creates a plurality of experience that keeps players engaged and coming back for more.

6 minutes ago, ricefrisbeetreats said:

There's a group of 5 or 6 of us with pretty equal skill. On any given night, I've watched a Rieeken fleet get butchered by a Leia all NebB fleet and a Cracken fleet crush whatever the "hotness" was at the time.

But like I said, you could probably develop that perfect list, but unless you are able to test into a vacuum, there's too many variables. For instance, going to a regional where the top players are known to fly a Rieeken Ace fleet is going to meta in a lot of anti-squad pusher or ace fleets like Sloane or the new upgrades coming out. Or if you have a fleet that's one beefed up ship with a bunch of flotillas to allow that really hard punch, well, you might see lists skew that way.

I ask bc I'm very interested in this theme.

At nationals I saw very many different fleets, but generally speaking it was the well known archetypes that did well.

But there were some outliers.

And it's also unknown of the fleets that did well did so because of player skill, if they were stronger fleets, or a combination.

3 hours ago, kmanweiss said:

FFG did a poor job of handling this problem with X-wing. Power creep, expensive repaints to get useful cards to make old stuff good again, etc.

They are doing a much better job of handling it with Armada.

Books and codex systems don't work well for a game like Armada. The stats are right there on the cards and cardboard. It's really no different than paying for errata.

What might work, and would actually be nice (as it would solve other issues they have also) is errata reprints. Stick all the non-plastic stuff in a pack the size of most trading card packs you see in stores, stick a $5 tag on it, call it a day. This fixes 3 problems at once and is entirely optional. Lost or damage products? Buy the $5 errata pack and replace those items. Tired of using the old version of cards and having to refer to the ever expanding errata? Buy the $5 errata pack and replace the old with the new. Tired of having to search Ebay for that rare upgrade and you don't want to be 2 more AFMk2 expansion packs? Pick up 2 errata packs instead! None of this stuff would be mandatory, but it would be optional and any loss in duplicate expansion sales for rare upgrades would be more than compensated for by the purchasing of all the errata packs.

Something like the Correlian Campaign could do this too - adds gameplay value while also updating or errating cards or issues.

While i agree armada games can be won by most fleet types depending on player skill and objectives. The statement/claim that armada can be won by any fleet is undeniably false.

A yavaris carrier with ackbar plus multiple gr75 medium transports with 0 squadrons. Precision strike, fighter ambush and solar corona.

Its a fleet. Can you win with it?

IMHO no, so i view the statement any fleet can win as false... however most fleets can have a decent chance at winning, so armadas in a good place right now

1 hour ago, DrakonLord said:

While i agree armada games can be won by most fleet types depending on player skill and objectives. The statement/claim that armada can be won by any fleet is undeniably false.

Insert poorly designed fleet.

That’s a straw man argument right there and You didn’t read the conversation. What’s been said is: there’s a place for any ship. If you have a love affair with Ackbar, you might end up going 1 way and a guy who wants a bunch of CR90s might try something completely different. By no means can a fleet win if it’s built without proper consideration of components.

1 hour ago, DrakonLord said:

Its a fleet. Can you win with it?

Run like **** and flak an enemy squadron to win.

Done very similar.

I mean, I used to run "training games" where my fleet was created by the Random button on FAB's Armada Fleet builder.

1 hour ago, DrakonLord said:

While i agree armada games can be won by most fleet types depending on player skill and objectives. The statement/claim that armada can be won by any fleet is undeniably false.

A yavaris carrier with ackbar plus multiple gr75 medium transports with 0 squadrons. Precision strike, fighter ambush and solar corona.

Its a fleet. Can you win with it?

IMHO no, so i view the statement any fleet can win as false... however most fleets can have a decent chance at winning, so armadas in a good place right now

I understand what you mean by, not any fleet can win. But when people say that they mean, “any sensible fleet” sensible meaning not bringing yavaris or gallant haven without squads or taking ackbar gr 75 cause if you do that then your just stupid

I came online, saw the 3 "you have been quoted in..." notifications and laughed my head off.

My post was making fun of the language/phrase used. Saying " any fleet" can win, Obviously @ricefrisbeetreats didnt get the joke.

@Drasnighta i almost want to try that now hahahaha

@Jabby people can mean whatever they want, its what they say that matters. Its why online chat can be a *****. I can say " hey your a D***" online and you may think its offensive, but i may mean it as a joke, or something else. See my point? No? Oh well.

As you just proved, its not that hard to change "any fleet" to "sensible fleet" lol. If your gonna use the phrase "any fleet" im still gonna be annoying and disagree, not "any fleet" can win. Most fleets? 99.999999999% of fleets? Sure.

28 minutes ago, DrakonLord said:

people can mean whatever they want, its what they say that matters. Its why online chat can be a *****. I can say " hey your a D***" online and you may think its offensive, but i may mean it as a joke, or something else. See my point? No? Oh well.

I understand exactly what you mean

2 hours ago, DrakonLord said:

My post was making fun of the language/phrase used. Saying " any fleet" can win, Obviously @ricefrisbeetreats didnt get the joke.

...you're not really going to continue to go down the list of intellectually dishonest debate tactics...are you?

Does "any ship" mean a class plus it's title or just a ship class? Can we really count "any Neb is viable" when Yavaris is being used 99% of the time? What about Demo? Are Glads really viable without its title and are they placing high in tournaments?

16 minutes ago, Undeadguy said:

Does "any ship" mean a class plus it's title or just a ship class? Can we really count "any Neb is viable" when Yavaris is being used 99% of the time? What about Demo? Are Glads really viable without its title and are they placing high in tournaments?

At least in my statement, I was referring to any "Expansion Pack" being useful in at least some way

1 hour ago, Drasnighta said:

At least in my statement, I was referring to any "Expansion Pack" being useful in at least some way

Mine, too. It may only be a single list, but I think that you can find a home for any expansion if you get the right list.

I think the problem is the disconnect when a new player thinks "Oh, I can do ANYTHING?" and then gets absolutely crushed when they fly some list that doesn't have any synergy whatsoever. This is why I usually ask new players what ships they're interested in and try to push the rest of their list in a direction that complements those ships.

58 minutes ago, ricefrisbeetreats said:

Mine, too. It may only be a single list, but I think that you can find a home for any expansion if you get the right list.

I think the problem is the disconnect when a new player thinks "Oh, I can do ANYTHING?" and then gets absolutely crushed when they fly some list that doesn't have any synergy whatsoever. This is why I usually ask new players what ships they're interested in and try to push the rest of their list in a direction that complements those ships.

You see, I refuse to do that. I don't want my concept of synergy (which, let's face it, Nose Punch Cray=Cray) to influence their game. I want them to build their own...

I am completely up front with new players... I let them know that its a contemplative game, and there is "combat" of sorts in all aspects of the game - from list building to maneuver to flying, and that they just have to pause and consider how everything works together, or at least, goes overboard in a single direction so far as to be its own form of singular synergy. I let them know that there is a steep learning curve, and losing is nothing terrible or to get strung up over, because things can be so **** exacting at the start...

I feel, at least, with what I've done growing the Hothgary area somewhat, is that its given us a very diverse meta with lots of different opinions and lists in tournaments.

2 minutes ago, Drasnighta said:

You see, I refuse to do that. I don't want my concept of synergy (which, let's face it, Nose Punch Cray=Cray) to influence their game. I want them to build their own...

I guess it depends on the new initiate. I usually ask them what they like and do a "oh well, you should also check out this, this and this then." It kind of gives them a springboard to start working from without completely forcing them in one direction. The few people I've ever let go directionless ended up only using netdeck/netlists because they felt so overwhelmed by the thought of having ownership of their list.

I let them know I'm there to talk to - day or night on the facebook group, basically - and go... If they ask for guidance, they ask for it and get it - but the point of the statement, to me at least, is to get them thinking about it, and then, what to ask about it...

But I also acknowledge that, as I said, I'm crazy with my own list building

11 hours ago, Drasnighta said:

I mean, I used to run "training games" where my fleet was created by the Random button on FAB's Armada Fleet builder.

I'm not that good, but as a novice I have the same general experience: Every fleet I make with a bit of thought behind it gives me a fun and interesting game.

The biggest problem I have with Armada is that it takes me 4-5 hours to play a game. Two years of casual playing, I still don't know how to get a game down to a 2 hr tournament duration. If I could fit a game into a weeknight evening, I'd play even more.

Just now, ShoutingMan said:

I'm not that good, but as a novice I have the same general experience: Every fleet I make with a bit of thought behind it gives me a fun and interesting game.

The biggest problem I have with Armada is that it takes me 4-5 hours to play a game. Two years of casual playing, I still don't know how to get a game down to a 2 hr tournament duration. If I could fit a game into a weeknight evening, I'd play even more.

When training my own speed, I started by recording (audio only) my game and trying to work out what was taking me so long... Was it me, was it my moving, my thinking, or was it my opponent sa well ?

First step is identifying - for me, it was just a matter of reinforcing the fact you have to kind of mentally pre-prepare and plan during y our opponents turn... And don't agonize over the nitty gritty

8 minutes ago, Drasnighta said:

When training my own speed, I started by recording (audio only) my game and trying to work out what was taking me so long... Was it me, was it my moving, my thinking, or was it my opponent sa well ?

First step is identifying - for me, it was just a matter of reinforcing the fact you have to kind of mentally pre-prepare and plan during y our opponents turn... And don't agonize over the nitty gritty

The last game i started being more intentional about gameplay -- and I know in board gaming I'm often the slow player (as my wife often reminds me ). So I set a 2-minute timer on my phone, that I'd run on my activations. The start of the game, no problem. I was doing everything in under two minutes. I was also reminding myself to pre-plan during my opponent's activations, to be ready.

But then we get to Round 3 and 4, and there are a lot of tactical choices to make, all the ships are converging, squadrons are happening, and it's taking 5 to 10 minutes to figure out what to do and also making sure all the upgrades and side effects are played out correctly. Likewise for my Armada partner: he's really slowing down in the thick of it.

So that's next: figure out how to be efficient during the heat of the battle, and to be even faster during the first couple rounds to have more time to spare in the slower rounds. And hopefully start doing some 200 point games on weeknights, to mitigate the challenges of scheduling full 400 point games.

I might try audio recording the next game. That's a good idea.

As you get more familiar with Upgrades, upgrade speed just... happens... You take less time, but that is certainly a factor of practice - without practice, it doesn't improve

We've gotten to the point that @LegionOfBOOM and I smash through 6-7 games in an 10 hour period, including list building in between games (as we only start with 1-2 read to go )

Definitely an aspect: I'm flying new fleets every game, often with new ships and/or upgrades for first time. Every game is new. And there's often a moment still in every game were we stop and say "Hey, does it do this or that with Upgrade X? We better check the forums!"

And that last game, I realized that Armada is a different experience when you are moving faster, and making faster decisions. I liked it, it's more dramatic. And strategic mistakes can happen, that's also thrilling in its way.

Hope to play more in 2018, to get faster and so play more more.

1 hour ago, Drasnighta said:

As you get more familiar with Upgrades, upgrade speed just... happens... You take less time, but that is certainly a factor of practice - without practice, it doesn't improve

We've gotten to the point that @LegionOfBOOM and I smash through 6-7 games in an 10 hour period, including list building in between games (as we only start with 1-2 read to go )

I think my play speed has more to do with playing warmachine and having to play on death clock than innate familiarity with rules.

Having played so long that way, it reinforced quick planning, decisions and adaptability. But with enough practice, you can crush 6 turns out pretty easy

While everyone is talking about game speeds, are there any tips for a faster set up as that usually seems to take up as much as about a third of the actual game when we get going however my storage solution isn't particularly elegant and contains all my armada stuff rather than just the fleet I'm flying.