6 minutes ago, Blail Blerg said:

Do you for even a second believe what you just wrote? Seriously?

Yes.

1 minute ago, ovinomanc3r said:

Yes.

Can you possibly defend that. Please try without attempting to only push your point. What are its counter arguments?

On 4/17/2018 at 12:06 AM, ovinomanc3r said:

I suppose that if all they want with every nerf were to resolve the "squadrons are OP", ffg could just reduce the 134 limitation.

They didn't so I guess they still don't see the things you see.

First of all, do you actually think this is what I think? Or do you wish to make a caricature of me because its easier and funnier to argue against? What's my actual argument?

*hint, you can look it up in my profile. It hasn't changed, its been there for the record.

Second: What you do you think these nerfs mean then? Explain, what's your analysis? In what ways do you think my analysis is wrong, in what ways do you think my analysis is right? Why were these nerfed, hard and multiple ways?

FAQ 1
Rieekan
flotillas no commander (great anime, i suggest watch)
Rhymer (doesn't pertain to rieekan ygh)
BCC no stack

FAQ 2
Yavaris - no moving
Gallant haven - minimum 1
2 flotilla limit
relay - within relay range

Just now, Blail Blerg said:

Can you possibly defend that. Please try without attempting to only push your point. What are its counter arguments?

Gallant Haven is not a squadron.

Yavaris is not a squadron.

Flotillas are not squadrons.

TRCs are not squadrons.

Avenger is not a squadron.

Riekaan is not a squadron.

Demolisher is not a squadron.

Bombing Command Center is not a squadron.

Rhymer is.

And relay is not but is a squadron keyword so, hey!, let's count it.

10 nerfs (not counting wording mistakes like RLB and Jamming Fields)

2 are directly squadrons. Another three are squadrons related upgrades. And another 2 touched the squadron game in some way but has too much to do with other things. However they nerf the things that made the squadrons better, not the squadrons. Squadrons were never OP per se. So, again, it is obvious FFG don't see what you see. I didn't say they didn't acknowledge the squadron play should be revised though. They did. But if all was about a plain affirmation about squadrons are OP they would directly nerfed like they did with Demo.

I still remember the Riekaan fever after the Worlds, when an entire threat couldnt find an agreement about what made that fleet strong. At the end FFG touched just Riekaan, nor the squadron, nor the flotillas. After that they nerfed flotillas and some ship titles, but again, no squadrons.

Also I should add that I still don't think Yavaris needed a nerf but I welcomed Gallant Haven one cause with Biggs it was ridiculous.

But again, if the problem were squadrons being too powerful why not directly reduce its capability? They did with flotillas. No more than two, done! Why not no more than 100 points? Aaahh! Is not a problem about squadrons rather than some combinations? That's make sense. Well, they already fixed that right? Then, "thanks FFG, it is not all I deserved but it is all I needed, thanks again".

If I end up with your point reduced to Squadrons are OP maybe it is cause you made it a ******* mantra. But I will acknowledged my honest mistake about it. Move on.

Also let's count the additions, not just the subtractions:

CC squadrons

Squadrons ambush objective

AFFM

RLB

Quasar

Sloane

Rebel Squadron Pack II

Imperial Squadron Pack II

Gauntlet

Quasar titles

And others things support or fight squadrons better I don't know all names yet.

1 hour ago, Blail Blerg said:

Did you remove for Yavaris? Did you account for MSU?

Nope

Quote

50% of players only used ONE small ship. Typically around 70 points in 400. Gee.... now ain't that low?

I don’t know, depends what your bias towards small ships is

Quote

Which wave are you talking about? "1/8th of top 4 fleets the previous wave were MSU!" Can you post the table?

Sure- but you posted that data!

“breaking wave 6 fleets down between 3+ smalls (non-flotillas) and 0-2 non-flot smalls gets: (top 4/all)

3+ Small 7/57

0-2 Small 42/185“

1 hour ago, Blail Blerg said:

Which previous wave??? Did you mean wave3/4? Last I recall, we're in wave7.

Wave 6, what you posted.

1 hour ago, Blail Blerg said:

YX + Other Squad comprises literally 86% of the top8. EIGHTY SIX PERCENT of fleets have 120+ squads

Cool, I thought we were talking about small ships...

13 minutes ago, TheCallum said:

Cool, I thought we were talking about small ships...

We were until you didn’t agree with THE HOLY DATA

1 hour ago, ovinomanc3r said:

I still remember the Riekaan fever after the Worlds, when an entire threat couldnt find an agreement about what made that fleet strong. At the end FFG touched just Riekaan, nor the squadron, nor the flotillas. After that they nerfed flotillas and some ship titles, but again, no squadrons.

I generally agree with you but need to point out that nerfing Riekaan only promoted the rest of the general archetype for both factions. Which made

We're finally seeing an effort to bring the strengths of both factions into equivalence. Rebels had defense to the point where Imperial players could not do damage, Imps had alpha strikes that Rebels couldn't endure no matter what. Squadrons have had certain options to make them effectively impossible to deal with, ships have had the benefit of a activation advantage to ignore the worst of ship-on-ship damage.

There had to be variance and balance. Squadrons need to be a threat. Ships need to be a threat. If they aren't a threat, they are not contributing to the game. If they are not contributing, they're not worth investing. And despite my obvious ship bias, I do think squads are a valuable contribution to the game.

So let's wait a few weeks and see how this shakes out in the most significant annual tournament in the game.

On 06/04/2018 at 6:24 PM, Blail Blerg said:

Count em up, now nerfed twice by FAQ, at least 8 ways:

FAQ 1
Rieekan
flotillas no commander (great anime, i suggest watch)
Rhymer (doesn't pertain to rieekan ygh)
BCC no stack

FAQ 2
Yavaris - no moving
Gallant haven - minimum 1
2 flotilla limit
relay - within relay range

Wave 7 120+ squads taken 19% of the time, increases linearly to 56% winrate.

3 hours ago, Blail Blerg said:

Do you always end with an adhom?

You also completely ignore any attempt to discuss the data. Please analyze it. Tell me Yavaris wasn't a problem.

Quoted from Baltanok, but I'm hoping he doesn't mind me removing the quote tag so he doesn't get a massive bother overtime I quote him for data.

here are 4 archetype definitions:

MSU: 3+ small ships, 0 larges, less than 120 squad points, no Yavaris

YX: Yavaris, 120+ squad points (YGH, Yav + Admo, etc)

Other Squad: 120+ squad pts, no Yavaris

Big Iron: 2+ larges, less than 120 squad pts.

here are the results, written as Top 4 finishes / all* entrants

#'s top 4/all	3/4	5	6	7
MSU	7/25	11/55	7/54	0/17
YX	6/15	10/24	14/25	10/21
Other Squad	6/24	11/47	20/71	16/42
Big Iron	1/11	3/15	7/41	15/68

Here's my interpretation for each archetype

YX: over-performing in all waves, with a small, but consistent following.

Other Squad: reasonable to strong performance, chosen by many admirals in all waves.

Big Iron: Underperforming in wave 3/4, but it became reasonable in wave 5, and many admirals picked it up in waves 6 & 7

MSU: Strong performance in wave 3/4, and reasonable in wave 5, but underperforming in wave 6, and both underperforming & under-represented in wave 7.

The archetypes are by no means exhaustive, I picked the definitions as much for ease of filtering as for theme. All entrants means all entrants that had a ranking. If I didn't know where a list ended up, it's not in the results.

I refer you to the OP, this thread is not about data or small ships. Please stay on topic.

Please refer to this thread for that discussion:

https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/topic/273363-thanks-to-faq-definitely-thinking-about-using-small-ships-more/

This thread is for gloating.

3 hours ago, Blail Blerg said:

Do you always end with an adhom?

You also completely ignore any attempt to discuss the data. Please analyze it. Tell me Yavaris wasn't a problem.

Quoted from Baltanok, but I'm hoping he doesn't mind me removing the quote tag so he doesn't get a massive bother overtime I quote him for data.

here are 4 archetype definitions:

MSU: 3+ small ships, 0 larges, less than 120 squad points, no Yavaris

YX: Yavaris, 120+ squad points (YGH, Yav + Admo, etc)

Other Squad: 120+ squad pts, no Yavaris

Big Iron: 2+ larges, less than 120 squad pts.

here are the results, written as Top 4 finishes / all* entrants

#'s top 4/all	3/4	5	6	7
MSU	7/25	11/55	7/54	0/17
YX	6/15	10/24	14/25	10/21
Other Squad	6/24	11/47	20/71	16/42
Big Iron	1/11	3/15	7/41	15/68

Here's my interpretation for each archetype

YX: over-performing in all waves, with a small, but consistent following.

Other Squad: reasonable to strong performance, chosen by many admirals in all waves.

Big Iron: Underperforming in wave 3/4, but it became reasonable in wave 5, and many admirals picked it up in waves 6 & 7

MSU: Strong performance in wave 3/4, and reasonable in wave 5, but underperforming in wave 6, and both underperforming & under-represented in wave 7.

The archetypes are by no means exhaustive, I picked the definitions as much for ease of filtering as for theme. All entrants means all entrants that had a ranking. If I didn't know where a list ended up, it's not in the results.

This data set is reflective more on what types of ships people are taking, not the squads. Based off this, MSU is struggling which isn't a surprise with Vader Cymoon and Raddus.

If you want to show squads are still OP, you should break down the data into smaller portions. Something like 0-50, 51-80, 81-110, 110+ and then apply that to bottom 25%, overall, top 25%, top 4, and winners. This would more accurately reflect how squads are performing.

Most importantly, is the data @Baltanok posted pre or post nerf? If it's pre-nerf, you have no claim to anything, and I'm pretty sure it's pre-nerf considering there are 3 flotilla lists in both Ards and Baltanoks spreadsheets.

This thread is a train wreck.

5 hours ago, Blail Blerg said:

Can you possibly defend that. Please try without attempting to only push your point. What are its counter arguments?

So a little over half of winning fleets are heavy squadrons, and a little under half aren't? You stated your initial point like it's some kind of bombshell that means squadrons are severely overpowered and you've been right all along. Tell me why I should think a 50/50 winning split is something to be concerned over.

100% of winning fleets use miniatures. They must be nerfed.

3 minutes ago, FoaS said:

100% of winning fleets use miniatures. They must be nerfed.

Finally!! Someone talking some sense

Just now, eViL dAvE said:

Finally!! Someone talking some sense

Don't say such mean things about me

10 minutes ago, JauntyChapeau said:

So a little over half of winning fleets are heavy squadrons, and a little under half aren't? You stated your initial point like it's some kind of bombshell that means squadrons are severely overpowered and you've been right all along. Tell me why I should think a 50/50 split is something to be concerned over.

In fact, I won a Regional with a no-squads build, beating Sloane Aces and Rieekan Aces on the way. So my anecdote data suggests that squads are underpowered and need buffed. Prove me wrong

1 minute ago, FoaS said:

Don't say such mean things about me

My Apologies for wounding you so mightily

25 minutes ago, FoaS said:

100% of winning fleets use miniatures. They must be nerfed.

We pointed out the OP-ness of the mantool in another thread. Pretty sure they need to address that serious issue before the miniatures one....just say'n.

Oh sorry. One sec:

"100% of all games won since the beginning of competitive armada used a man tool."

DATA!

Someone get this man on a podcast so a concise, real time discussion can take place.

I don't think anyone should put this much effort into data that is all self-reported or collected ad-hoc. IMO, the most important data for a game is the qualitative piece. One simple question: "Did you have fun playing?"

And then a 3-month follow-up if the answer is no, "Can you show us on what hull zone BTAvenger/Sloane Aces destroyed you?"

I love these threads. Honestly, Blail is one of my favorite guys on the forum because he's unrelenting with his "I TOLD YOU SO" posts.

I don't even fully disagree with what the OP was saying. I joined the forum just after wave 5 when all kinds squadron shenanigans were plaguing my meta. I honestly blame the degradation of our local group at the time on the strength of squadron synergy. I came into this forum whinging on and on about squads and it was already old news because Blail had been posting about it.

I grew to accept it over the last year, and shut up about it, but it doesn't make me appreciate the straight hilarity of Blail hitting these forums with "I told you so" posts any less.

Never change @Blail Blerg, I love the chaos it creates lmao.

27 minutes ago, Darth Sanguis said:

Share? It's almost lunch....