Ima go with a solid... sorta?

Reason: In a balanced game, there should never be "auto-include" items, or items that cost too much thus never get played, when something else does something very similar. When things like this occur, it creates a stale meta card wise. Looking at Yavaris as an example, I've built a baller gunline rebel fleet, using Sato with the core ser Xwings and Han. My Nebulon B, I plan on using Salvation. But people are against that, Yavaris is more "powerful and cost effective."

Any time I hear something like that, sorta like Gladiator and Demolisher, it makes me want to use Auto-includes less. The other cards are just as viable, if yes, a litte more expensive. I use ACMs, and EAs, because they are fun to me and people tell me not to.

4 hours ago, Ling27 said:

. I use ACMs, and EAs, because they are fun to me and people tell me not to.

How Dare you try to have FUN, you need to Sell your Soul to the Competition god's and Waste your Hobby Time endlessly Min-Maxing for Deadly Efficiency

1 hour ago, clontroper5 said:

How Dare you try to have FUN, you need to Sell your Soul to the Competition god's and Waste your Hobby Time endlessly Min-Maxing for Deadly Efficiency

Hey I love EA and ACM and think they're both very solid upgrades.

Anyway overall yes I'd say Armada is the most well balanced minis game I've probably ever played. The only issues I have are with some of the internal pricing/balance on upgrades. There are some real duds that could use tweaking. The overall game though is excellently balanced.

10 hours ago, Green Knight said:

It was a snide way of saying 'I don't agree with a single word of what you wrote'.

Sorry.

I laid out three possible ways in which people might makes sense of the term "balance" when talking about a competitive boardgame. What do you disagree with? Do you think there are better definitions of balance, or perhaps a more universally agreed upon definition of "balance" that boardgamers tend to invoke? If so, please share.

Otherwise, I have no idea how you could "disagree with every single word I wrote" when the big majority of the post was "here's three different ways I've seen people use the term "balance" when talking about games." I ... I don't see how anyone could vehemently disagree with that...?

3 hours ago, clontroper5 said:

How Dare you try to have FUN, you need to Sell your Soul to the Competition god's and Waste your Hobby Time endlessly Min-Maxing for Deadly Efficiency

As I said at one of the Store Championships I went to... I go to the Store Championships to up numbers. I like Armada, the game is sorta-well balanced, and I want more stuff to come.

3 minutes ago, Ling27 said:

As I said at one of the Store Championships I went to... I go to the Store Championships to up numbers. I like Armada, the game is sorta-well balanced, and I want more stuff to come.

Somebody has to be the at the bottom hahaha. Might as well play and have fun while youre there!

7 hours ago, Ling27 said:

Ima go with a solid... sorta?

Reason: In a balanced game, there should never be "auto-include" items, or items that cost too much thus never get played, when something else does something very similar.

Pretty much exactly this. I mean, there are a lot of upgrades that never get used because there are other upgrades competing for their same slot that are woefully more powerful.

For a good chunk of this game's run, Electronic Countermeasures and XI7 Turbolasers have been prime examples of this, and even now seven waves into the game with far more options ECM and XI7 still make a strong case for auto-inclusion on many of the ships that are filling those respective slots with upgrades. Dash Rendar is miles more popular than Han Solo, despite both being very similarly costed, and it's pretty impossible to find a Rebel list with squadrons that doesn't bring Jan Ors.

Titles are especially telling here. No one has, does, or ever will run Insidious instead of Demolisher on their GSD. The same could be said for many of the head-scratchingly bad titles that are out there (e.g. Redemption, Warlord, etc.). How often do you see an MC80L with the Endeavor or Liberty title instead of the Mon Karren? Home One or Independence instead of Defiance? Did you know that Avenger isn't the only ISD title and that there are five other ISD titles out there????? Who knew, right??

15 minutes ago, AllWingsStandyingBy said:

Pretty much exactly this. I mean, there are a lot of upgrades that never get used because there are other upgrades competing for their same slot that are woefully more powerful.

For a good chunk of this game's run, Electronic Countermeasures and XI7 Turbolasers have been prime examples of this, and even now seven waves into the game with far more options ECM and XI7 still make a strong case for auto-inclusion on many of the ships that are filling those respective slots with upgrades. Dash Rendar is miles more popular than Han Solo, despite both being very similarly costed, and it's pretty impossible to find a Rebel list with squadrons that doesn't bring Jan Ors.

Titles are especially telling here. No one has, does, or ever will run Insidious instead of Demolisher on their GSD. The same could be said for many of the head-scratchingly bad titles that are out there (e.g. Redemption, Warlord, etc.). How often do you see an MC80L with the Endeavor or Liberty title instead of the Mon Karren? Home One or Independence instead of Defiance? Did you know that Avenger isn't the only ISD title and that there are five other ISD titles out there????? Who knew, right??

I did pretty well with Home One at World's...

While you make a pretty reasonable case overall, some of your examples say a lot more about your meta than the game at large.

3 minutes ago, AllWingsStandyingBy said:

Dash Rendar is miles more popular than Han Solo, despite both being very similarly costed, and it's pretty impossible to find a Rebel list with squadrons that doesn't bring Jan Ors.

Here in the PNW I haven't fought Dash in about a year, whereas I fight Han semi regularly (most recently a month ago.) He doesn't show up too much, but more than Dash. Rebel squadron lists without Jan are downright common (not bomber wings, of course. She's their only Intel ace, of course she's gonna get used there.) Endeavor, Independence and Relentless all make appearances too. My point is context matters. Different places have different fleets they need to counter, some people play what they think is fun, and frankly, some upgrades are underrated. I think Endeavor is better than Mon Karren because the second token they'll spend is probably a redirect. Bring XI7s, save 2 points. If squadless ISD lists grow too common somewhere (and they are on the rise,) maybe throwing 4 B-wings into position for a bombing run at the start of round two becomes better than Defiance. You're right overall; there's crap overshadowed by gold. But people have a lot more choices than they think sometimes, too.

17 minutes ago, AllWingsStandyingBy said:

Pretty much exactly this. I mean, there are a lot of upgrades that never get used because there are other upgrades competing for their same slot that are woefully more powerful.

For a good chunk of this game's run, Electronic Countermeasures and XI7 Turbolasers have been prime examples of this, and even now seven waves into the game with far more options ECM and XI7 still make a strong case for auto-inclusion on many of the ships that are filling those respective slots with upgrades. Dash Rendar is miles more popular than Han Solo, despite both being very similarly costed, and it's pretty impossible to find a Rebel list with squadrons that doesn't bring Jan Ors.

Titles are especially telling here. No one has, does, or ever will run Insidious instead of Demolisher on their GSD. The same could be said for many of the head-scratchingly bad titles that are out there (e.g. Redemption, Warlord, etc.). How often do you see an MC80L with the Endeavor or Liberty title instead of the Mon Karren? Home One or Independence instead of Defiance? Did you know that Avenger isn't the only ISD title and that there are five other ISD titles out there????? Who knew, right??

You really should have been at one of the SCs in Phoenix. I had Han Solo in my Sato list (with no Dash or Jan Ors), played against a list with Demo and Insidious in it (yes, Demo is better, but only an "auto-include" if you are using a Glad, not necessarily an auto-include in any list), and a list with Warlord in it. And currently playing in a CC campaign where there is a fleet with Sovereign and Relentless, but no Avenger.

13 hours ago, Lightrock said:

I used to think that Phantoms are gimmicky and pointless. After Ginkapo showed me what they can do with Sloane I no longer think so.

I thought you were the one person I didnt show what phantoms can do!

I have to say... so far, I think it is VERY balanced. Each faction has highs and lows... all can be countered effectively with the right build. If you go too far one way or another... you cannot stop everything. This is how a power build should be... every one has their weakness if you focus too much on any one thing. A well balanced tool box fleet works well every time AND.. there are so many tool boxes you can make!!!

Most importantly..... THERE ARE SO MANY VIABLE/WINABLE BUILDS!!! It comes down to dice and skill.... and that is on the admiral controlling said fleet....

39 minutes ago, Poniatowski said:

I

Most importantly..... THERE ARE SO MANY VIABLE/WINABLE BUILDS!!! It comes down to dice and skill.... and that is on the admiral controlling said fleet....

Especially Reeikan Aces!!

(Dumb rebel scum, winning every thing while I was away... )

2 hours ago, clontroper5 said:

Especially Reeikan Aces!!

(Dumb rebel scum, winning every thing while I was away... )

^@clontroper5 (for a while)

But you're back to lead us in another Galactic Crussade!!

1 hour ago, ovinomanc3r said:

^@clontroper5 (for a while)

But you're back to lead us in another Galactic Crussade!!

MUHAHAHA!!

Wait what were we talking about?

Is Armada balanced?

Is ECM the most obvious choice for def. retrofit?

Is Heavy Turbolaser turret ever taken?

Veteran Gunners?

Redemption?

External racks vs expanded launchers?

It goes on and on. People say that Armada is balanced, but it's just that they forgot the bunch of useless stuff that's in-game.

32 minutes ago, Sybreed said:

Is Armada balanced?

Is ECM the most obvious choice for def. retrofit?

Is Heavy Turbolaser turret ever taken?

Veteran Gunners?

Redemption?

External racks vs expanded launchers?

It goes on and on. People say that Armada is balanced, but it's just that they forgot the bunch of useless stuff that's in-game.

People don't forget that. It just happens that they don't consider a some bad designed cards make a difference.

If you put 1kg of tomatoes and 3kg of lemons on side and 2kg of bananas and 2kg of apples there will be balance, you know?

6 hours ago, Sybreed said:

Is Armada balanced?

Is ECM the most obvious choice for def. retrofit?

Is Heavy Turbolaser turret ever taken?

Veteran Gunners?

Redemption?

External racks vs expanded launchers?

It goes on and on. People say that Armada is balanced, but it's just that they forgot the bunch of useless stuff that's in-game.

I don't think that useless upgrades make the game unbalanced. If there were multiple ships that were just unplayable, or if one faction held complete dominance over the field, or if there were only a single style of fleet were winning tournaments, those are things I would consider to be balance issues.

Useless upgrades? Small potatoes compared to the other issues noted above.

If the biggest balance complaint we have is that a number of upgrades aren't competitive choices, I think we're in a good place.

12 hours ago, Sybreed said:

Is Armada balanced?

Is ECM the most obvious choice for def. retrofit? - no

Is Heavy Turbolaser turret ever taken? - yes, not often but i have seens them

Veteran Gunners? - yes they are being used

Redemption? - yes, really great in CC

External racks vs expanded launchers? - both are good and both are being used

It goes on and on. People say that Armada is balanced, but it's just that they forgot the bunch of useless stuff that's in-game.

Do you really judge if a game is balanced if every single card is used/similar?
Are you saying that the whole game Aramada is not balanced because there is one card that was designed with another idea in the past? Heavy Turbolaser Turrets are a good idea and good card. There are just so many cards that are better. Especially in this slot (H9, TRC, XI7, Quad Battery, DTT, Quad Turbolaser, Enhanced Armament, Spinal, XX-9 and even Slaved Turrets). All of the other cards are great and being used really often.

Sorry, but i know no game where this is the case (not even Poker or Chess, at least for the similar part. Two aces are just better than two deuce. And what figure are you choosing when you get a pawn to the opposite side of the board? Most of the time the promotion is done to a queen. And why do you want to promote a pawn after all, if they are balanced they would be equal to a queen (i hope you understand what i mean).

I judge a game if it is balanced if there is more than one fleet that can be played, if you have a chance against all kind of fleets, and if you have the choice what upgrades you want to play (ACM or APT`? Do i use Brunson or Intel Officer or even Tua?...). So mainly if you have more than one "must use" pick for a slot. And just because there are cards that are not so usefull it does not mean that you don't have a choice for the slot.

Yes, there are cards that are better than others, when it comes to specific fleets. If you are playing rebels and if you are playing squadrons, the Yavaris is just a great pick and support for it. But it is no general must have for all fleets. If you are not playing squadrons the Yavaris is suddenly a crap card (because it is useless in the fleet).

Second point:
The player and the meta decide what cards are usefull.
ECM is only so good because there are so many big ships flying around. But it is nearly pointless against a swarm list and against squadron lists (Sloane or Bomber). But the currently meta shift to MC80, MC75 and ISD. Ships that hammer in so much damage, and have spare dice for the accuracy, that you need the brace.
And on the counter side, you need ECM mostly on big ships to protect them. Using ECM in a swarm list is rather expensive and wasted.
It would be different when every ship with a defense slot HAS TO add the ECM (or for the Imperial even have to use Tua and the ECM). Than i would agree that it is not balanced. But in the current state of the game? It is fine (imo).

People asked if the game is balanced, I gave my honest opinion that while the game is generally balanced, there are a lot of uprades cards/ships that would benefit from reworks or rebalance touches (cost, effect, etc) and cookie cutter builds have been plaguing the game since the beginning which required a massive errata this year. I may not be entirely correct, but I really doubt there's no room for improvements in armada.

7 hours ago, Sybreed said:

People asked if the game is balanced, I gave my honest opinion that while the game is generally balanced, there are a lot of uprades cards/ships that would benefit from reworks or rebalance touches (cost, effect, etc) and cookie cutter builds have been plaguing the game since the beginning which required a massive errata this year. I may not be entirely correct, but I really doubt there's no room for improvements in armada.

On 9/11/2018 at 8:42 PM, Sybreed said:

Is Armada balanced?

Is ECM the most obvious choice for def. retrofit?

Is Heavy Turbolaser turret ever taken?

Veteran Gunners?

Redemption?

External racks vs expanded launchers?

It goes on and on. People say that Armada is balanced, but it's just that they forgot the bunch of useless stuff that's in-game.

I tried hard but it is impossible to me to read that from this before your second post. It is actually hard even with your second post but whatever it is fine you had your opinion and it is better now it is explained.

However I doubt anyone who think Armada is balanced consider it perfect and if they said that I guess you can infer that was not what they truly said given your own talent to say A and to mean A+B with nuances.?

9 hours ago, ovinomanc3r said:

I tried hard but it is impossible to me to read that from this before your second post. It is actually hard even with your second post but whatever it is fine you had your opinion and it is better now it is explained.

However I doubt anyone who think Armada is balanced consider it perfect and if they said that I guess you can infer that was not what they truly said given your own talent to say A and to mean A+B with nuances.?

I guess I shouldn't have used the word "balanced" when I made the first post. The game is balanced, but the perfectionnist in me is extremely annoyed by all the forgotten and less than optimal stuff put in the game.

21 minutes ago, Sybreed said:

I guess I shouldn't have used the word "balanced" when I made the first post. The game is balanced, but the perfectionnist in me is extremely annoyed by all the forgotten and less than optimal stuff put in the game.

I understand you. I would really like to get some use from some cards.

Some cards are in need of a system where the base size that you are putting it on determines the cost.

As someone mentioned, putting ECM on a corvette is silly at it's current cost for what you will get out of it. What is ECM was 3/5/7/9, based on size? or 2/4/7/10. Shouldn't using ECM on a smaller ship be much much easier? In MOST cases, the Defensive slot on a small ship is pretty dead.

The reverse could also be true, with a card being cheaper as the ship gets larger, this could make some ion/laser upgrades better for large ships without being too cheap on small ships.

Also gives an easy out of putting a "-" to indicate that a card can't be played. As opposed the rather wordy solution that is used right now.

All depends on how much FFG doesn't want to backtrack their system.

1 minute ago, AdmiralYor said:

Some cards are in need of a system where the base size that you are putting it on determines the cost.

As someone mentioned, putting ECM on a corvette is silly at it's current cost for what you will get out of it. What is ECM was 3/5/7/9, based on size? or 2/4/7/10. Shouldn't using ECM on a smaller ship be much much easier? In MOST cases, the Defensive slot on a small ship is pretty dead.

The reverse could also be true, with a card being cheaper as the ship gets larger, this could make some ion/laser upgrades better for large ships without being too cheap on small ships.

Also gives an easy out of putting a "-" to indicate that a card can't be played. As opposed the rather wordy solution that is used right now.

All depends on how much FFG doesn't want to backtrack their system.

not sure I agree with this. If ECM cost less depending on ship size, than you make the card even more omnipresent than it is. A simple cost rebalancing should be enough.