I strongly believe that a true fun to fly list is adaptable to everything you throw at it anyways... It shouldnt just be adapted to a meta of flotilla/relay/fish farm etc.

All these points about adaptability seem to me to neglect that some players have a stalwart advantage thanks to such a late FAQ release. Namely, those players who knew of the changes in advance, because they are playtesters, and those players who are in the lucky position that their fleets are not affected by any errata.

Yes, a good player should be able to adopt. But it seems to me to be a ridiculous requirement that a worlds winner should be able to play at least as good with a hastily changed or even built fleet as a player who was not in need of that.

I won't go to "worlds" at the other end of the world. Hence, I am not affected. But I can understand those who think that a late FAQ is a mess.

This will be a bit more contentious point but I think will get a big change before worlds no matter what just because FFG is a business. While some people love flotillas, IMO they are bad for the image of the game. I can't tell you how many times passerbys or interested parties have looked at the fish farm or 1+5 and someone says "that's dumb." It doesn't look great aesthetically and it's hard to explain how it's fun subjectively/objectively. To have that as a real possibility being the best choice of fleet at worlds is bad publicity.

56 minutes ago, Darth Veggie said:

Yes, a good player should be able to adopt. But it seems to me to be a ridiculous requirement that a worlds winner should be able to play at least as good with a hastily changed or even built fleet as a player who was not in need of that.

It's the world championship. 'Ridiculous' is a perfectly fine standard for how good someone should be.

2 hours ago, Darth Veggie said:

All these points about adaptability seem to me to neglect that some players have a stalwart advantage thanks to such a late FAQ release. Namely, those players who knew of the changes in advance, because they are playtesters, and those players who are in the lucky position that their fleets are not affected by any errata.

Yes, a good player should be able to adopt. But it seems to me to be a ridiculous requirement that a worlds winner should be able to play at least as good with a hastily changed or even built fleet as a player who was not in need of that.

I won't go to "worlds" at the other end of the world. Hence, I am not affected. But I can understand those who think that a late FAQ is a mess.

The “neglected point” is based on an un proven assumption.

Yes, that there is a major errata. But that is a completely different point that makes the entire discussion superfluous (but does funnily not even touch the argument that it is simply absurd that a worlds winner should be so adoptable to win against a player who does not need to adopt. Skill equal the latter will win in the majority of the cases).

31 minutes ago, Darth Veggie said:

Yes, that there is a major errata. But that is a completely different point that makes the entire discussion superfluous (but does funnily not even touch the argument that it is simply absurd that a worlds winner should be so adoptable to win against a player who does not need to adopt. Skill equal the latter will win in the majority of the cases).

Skill equal is still the assumption there.

Not being able to practice is an assumption.

Ok, so the FAQ hit, and there is nothing in there that either shouldn't have been anticipated or can be compensated for.

So everything is good, 1 month warning is sufficient.

13 minutes ago, Green Knight said:

Ok, so the FAQ hit, and there is nothing in there that either shouldn't have been anticipated or can be compensated for.

So everything is good, 1 month warning is sufficient.

But things are different and I'm whiny! Complain, complain, complaaaaaain!

Just now, geek19 said:

But things are different and I'm whiny! Complain, complain, complaaaaaain!

You forgot salty. Armada is the game of dead salt plains.

2 minutes ago, Green Knight said:

You forgot salty. Armada is the game of dead salt plains.

I was yelled at yesterday for being too salty, so I'm on a salt free diet. Also, after this FAQ, probably a sense free one, too.....

5 hours ago, ImpStarDeuces said:

I can't tell you how many times passerbys or interested parties have looked at the fish farm or 1+5 and someone says "that's dumb."

This sounds like extreme hyperbole to me. I've played Armada at every Gencon, I've played in multiple Regionals, I've played at a dozen "kit" tournaments and in two Corellian Conflicts at the FLGS. I can count on one hand the number of times a non-Armada passerby gave my table a look for more than about 8 seconds. Never once have any of them commented anything other than "wow, looks cool" about the game/miniatures in general.

So I absolutely do not buy the argument that fleets with 3-4 flotillas were hurting the game's image in the eyes of passerbys who would have otherwise gone and bought a Core Set right then and there



Watch Scarif or Endor scenes. There are dozens of GR75s present in those battles, so a fleet with a handful of flotillas actually looks looked pretty screen-true. What is stupider looking, I'd argue, are fleets with 8x YT-2400 flying around as their only squadron support. Or seeing a JM5K bounty hunter being integral to the squad-tactics of the Imperial Navy. But eh, even those don't bother me too much.

Just now, AllWingsStandyingBy said:

So I absolutely do not buy the argument that fleets with 3-4 flotillas were hurting the game's image in the eyes of passerbys who would have otherwise gone and bought a Core Set right then and there

something something on the margins

21 minutes ago, AllWingsStandyingBy said:

I can't tell you how many times passerbys or interested parties have looked at the fish farm or 1+5 and someone says "that's dumb."

You missed the part where everyone clapped and @Worthington FFG III showed up and gave you $100.

20 minutes ago, AllWingsStandyingBy said:

This sounds like extreme hyperbole to me. I've played Armada at every Gencon, I've played in multiple Regionals, I've played at a dozen "kit" tournaments and in two Corellian Conflicts at the FLGS. I can count on one hand the number of times a non-Armada passerby gave my table a look for more than about 8 seconds. Never once have any of them commented anything other than "wow, looks cool" about the game/miniatures in general.

QFT.

"Wow, looks cool" is about 2000% more likely to happen if there's an ISD on the table, though. Everyone knows and loves space triangles.

2 hours ago, AllWingsStandyingBy said:

This sounds like extreme hyperbole to me. I've played Armada at every Gencon, I've played in multiple Regionals, I've played at a dozen "kit" tournaments and in two Corellian Conflicts at the FLGS. I can count on one hand the number of times a non-Armada passerby gave my table a look for more than about 8 seconds. Never once have any of them commented anything other than "wow, looks cool" about the game/miniatures in general

Right, because we haven’t had a bunch of threads from people who actually play saying it looks dumb too and everyone watched the movies thinking they want to be a transport commander but you do you.