7 minutes ago, Drasnighta said:

It’s absolutely possible with what you already have available... more so for the Empire than the Rebels.

People want a solution they don’t need to think about how to use, where to position, when to strike, or how to otherwise invest in a layered response.

They just have a revulsion for fighters and want them to go away, on both sides.

Whereas there is no simple solution - nor should there be one.

Invest in your layered defense, and you will make up the points spent.

Invest in your overwhelming offense, and gamble it that way.

If you are wanting to ignore a portion of the game, then at least be willing to take what it takes to do so... that’s all I ask.

Good reasoning, the Raider 1 can do the anti-squadron role provided you use it wisely.

My only issue with Instigator, and I have used it a lot so far, is that it still flies. You cant just decide to have it hang out with squadrons, as it has to keep moving, and circling squads sounds great, but it can be frustrating to preform sometimes.

1 hour ago, Ling27 said:

My only issue with Instigator, and I have used it a lot so far, is that it still flies. You cant just decide to have it hang out with squadrons, as it has to keep moving, and circling squads sounds great, but it can be frustrating to preform sometimes.

That's why raiders like to stay at speed two unless they have a goal location.

Watched an Instigator pop EWS and slow to 0 to fend off squads for 4 turns, while the ISDs covering it barrelled forward.

was heartbreaking to watch.

11 minutes ago, Drasnighta said:

Watched an Instigator pop EWS and slow to 0 to fend off squads for 4 turns, while the ISDs covering it barrelled forward.

was heartbreaking to watch.

Was it used against you? Otherwise I would say it would be inspiration for my list building.

how did we get this far down the rabbit hole? if you don't like the suggestion about a new possible rebel small base flak ship, that's fine, but why crap on ppl for coming up with EU cannon ship ideas?

A rebel flak small base would be nice, that's all, raiders are situationaly good, but not typically a rewarding ship to take in a general fleet that is not oriented to utilize it.

We have most of the roles accounted for at this point so we are having to look at edge case option.

Imp/ broadside heavy Large Base would be a nice role but there is not really any cannon to support such a thing,

I think the most unexplored section of the game is alternative flotillas, the rebel bombers from Last Jedi could be a Flotilla, Imps could get something like the Missile Boats used on the X-Wing Alliance video game

offers an alternative to the same old flotillas we always see

11 minutes ago, Angry Ewok said:

Imp/ broadside heavy Large Base would be a nice role but there is not really any cannon to support such a thing,

Dreadnaught heavy cruisers could be an Imperial medium broadsider, but I can't think of any Imperial large broadside ships, unless you believe that a certain triangle is confused on which way to point...

This one knows the way. ?

I think we need little gunboat flotillas that cost like, 32/36 points for empire, 28/32 points for rebels. Something that you can use if you dont want to use squadrons, but still can plink a few shots into something without taking bombers if you do.

I know the empire needs something other than ISD shaped large. At least the Rebel Larges are slightly different shaped. Rebels need another medium, and preferably a carrier of some kind. Just because we see them USE a carrier in Rebels.

I would like to see more Mandalorian things, but thats because I like Mandos.

Another Niche we havent really seen in Armada, is the idea of a submarine. We get it with the stealth cruiser in CW, and Tarkins personal craft is the Spike later one if I recall... and I think it could work if you give it evades and a scatter. Give it a similar armament to a CR90?

Another fun idea, could be a mine layer, that gets Mine Tokens that you can place touching the rear arc of it before it moves. This would give an interesting mechanic as well as change how people worked, as if they overlapped the token you would take damage, either just to shields or to the hull. Give it a limited number of mines per game, say 3, and you add planning to it as well.

2 hours ago, Angry Ewok said:

how did we get this far down the rabbit hole? if you don't like the suggestion about a new possible rebel small base flak ship, that's fine, but why crap on ppl for coming up with EU cannon ship ideas?

I'm not adverse to the EU canon ship ideas.

I'm adverse to the sorts and wordings and intent of rules people are wanting to attach to them.

no your just trying to make a fuss and be confrontational about a silly, wish thead/FFG plz read this and give us new toys thread. this is all just speculation, why get bent up over other ppls wish lists?

8 minutes ago, Angry Ewok said:

no your just trying to make a fuss and be confrontational about a silly, wish thead/FFG plz read this and give us new toys thread. this is all just speculation, why get bent up over other ppls wish lists?

Perhaps because at least one time in the past it was quoted by an employee that having a great idea pop up on the forum is a great way for it to never be done, because there is a possibility they can't "prove" they came up with it first and "own" it for licensing arrangements?

I mean, I know its dubious. But it was still stated, and thus, I prefer people to keep ideas to themselves...

And if I can't do that... Then I'm going to at least try to educate people on better game and rule design. Its one of the very few skills I actually have.

And since the whole thread is essentially BS wishlisting anyway... I'll wishlist better rules, and encourage contemplation as to usilising what people have to fulfill their actual desires now at the same time.

so basically you just like arguing and telling people they are doing it wrong. That's cool, I'm out of this thread. Did not know the rules lawyers also had jurisdiction in the hypothetical "What cool stuff would you like to see added to the game," department too?

@Angry Ewok I get what you're saying. Sometimes I think people forget as well that its not all about competition but about rule of cool, thematic/casual play and just having fun by having really cool stuff. We shouldn't have to feel bad about our ideas either... I hope you don't leave though. I find these wish threads and such to be quite enjoyable as well. Just having the ideas helps me keep excited about this game, especially when there isn't a lot of news or development and to just imagine the further potential this game has.

9 minutes ago, BlueSquadronPilot said:

@Angry Ewok I get what you're saying. Sometimes I think people forget as well that its not all about competition but about rule of cool, thematic/casual play and just having fun by having really cool stuff. We shouldn't have to feel bad about our ideas either... I hope you don't leave though. I find these wish threads and such to be quite enjoyable as well. Just having the ideas helps me keep excited about this game, especially when there isn't a lot of news or development and to just imagine the further potential this game has.

Like I said, there's nothing wrong with it.

Just like there's nothing wrong with having an opinion - in either direction.

Rules Lawyers only have power when you listen... And hey, if nothing else, there's always: https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/ignore/

34 minutes ago, Drasnighta said:

Like I said, there's nothing wrong with it.

Just like there's nothing wrong with having an opinion - in either direction.

Rules Lawyers only have power when you listen... And hey, if nothing else, there's always: https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/ignore/

For sure, I hope you don't take what I said as a slight to you or others (definitely not the intent!) sometimes I feel that both sides can get so caught up they forget that we all love the game and are entitled to bring our thoughts to the forum. Its great to have differing opinions on things and provide analysis and insight, definitely for the betterment of the game and for us as armada players. Also @Drasnighta brings up great points about FFG's stance which I myself would definitely be concerned about, however I am sure they have a lot of ideas on the backburner.

I just don't want @Angry Ewok or anyone else to feel like they cant contribute, nor do I want others to be painted as bad guys.... because I can definitely appreciate a lot of what others bring to the table.

2 hours ago, Angry Ewok said:

no your just trying to make a fuss and be confrontational about a silly, wish thead/FFG plz read this and give us new toys thread. this is all just speculation, why get bent up over other ppls wish lists?

In fairness, many, many years ago I emailed a computer game company with a bunch of ideas & they wrote back saying they can’t use fan ideas incase they get sued. It’s unfortunately very much a thing in this horrid litigious society we live in.

That said, we had 20+ pages of SSD speculation & we still got it so hey, what do I know...

The main problem with the, "Don't talk about possibilities because then we cant use them..." line of logic is, then what are we supposed to talk about then? THAT, sounds like a fast way to kill a game.

One niche ship would be a neutral ( could be played by both side) transporter ship with no fighting or squadron carrying ability. It would be fun to protect that ship or hunt that ship during the game and I believe it will bring a new dynamic play to Armada.

20 minutes ago, Ling27 said:

The main problem with the, "Don't talk about possibilities because then we cant use them..." line of logic is, then what are we supposed to talk about then? THAT, sounds like a fast way to kill a game.

Tactics?

List builds?

Things we already have?

Tournaments?

Painting?

Rules?

Speculation is hardly the only topic remaining to us. ?

in fact, speculation about certain things is quite alright - juat be careful about how deep you go with it.

We live in a world where there are some real technicalities about legality that are often ignored- sometimes it ends up being at our own risk.

7 minutes ago, Drasnighta said:

Tactics?

List builds?

Things we already have?

Tournaments?

Painting?

Rules?

Speculation is hardly the only topic remaining to us. ?

There are sections for each of those. Battle reports, lists, rules questions. Those all, already exist. Obviously there are legality issues everywhere, mostly because some companies (disney) pushed some of those laws WAY further than they needed to be.

41 minutes ago, Ling27 said:

There are sections for each of those. Battle reports, lists, rules questions. Those all, already exist. Obviously there are legality issues everywhere, mostly because some companies (disney) pushed some of those laws WAY further than they needed to be.

Yep, that’s why I listed them.

Its as if we’re told subject categories we can talk about or something ?

I mean, I don’t like the look of the Tartan or Lancer, especially now “Lancer” is a reused name.

... but I do own a few squads of Mel’s Assault gunboats... Tge day I can use the fir more than differentiating Bomber Aces I’ll be happy ?

From a handful of articles I've been reading @Drasnighta I think that we are safe to post ideas and FFG could use those ideas or variations of those ideas without legal trouble.

https://io9.gizmodo.com/10-things-everyone-gets-wrong-about-intellectual-proper-1679011301

Speaking for myself I'd be happy as heck that FFG would use any part of my ideas.

2 hours ago, Piratical Moustache said:

From a handful of articles I've been reading @Drasnighta I think that we are safe to post ideas and FFG could use those ideas or variations of those ideas without legal trouble.

https://io9.gizmodo.com/10-things-everyone-gets-wrong-about-intellectual-proper-1679011301

Speaking for myself I'd be happy as heck that FFG would use any part of my ideas.

So there are two things that are important here:

1: Legality, which, may or may not be fuzzy. I am not an IP lawyer, nor do I claim to be one, but this is an issue that we may not understand.

2: FFG policy. We don't understand this, nor can we claim to.

Dras is saying that using ideas is against 2, for 1 (maybe).

1 minute ago, Do I need a Username said:

So there are two things that are important here:

1: Legality, which, may or may not be fuzzy. I am not an IP lawyer, nor do I claim to be one, but this is an issue that we may not understand.

2: FFG policy. We don't understand this, nor can we claim to.

Dras is saying that using ideas is against 2, for 1 (maybe).

FFG policy seems to be relaxed towards fan creations otherwise why wouldn't they shut down KDY and other fansites if it interferes with their ability to make future content?

I don't see how a fan could sue FFG for using his or her Venator stats, when the fan obviously didn't make the Venator in the first place for example.

Besides what fan of Armada would engage in such parasitic behavior and not feel shame for it?

Risk equals severity times likelyhood