7 minutes ago, Admiral Theia said:

As for that last, unless their opponent is **** new, it would be near impossible to do, because as second player you'd get last-firsted by something that can kill you without caring what defensive upgrade you have. And then it will happen again the next turn.

Indeed, which is why it's speculative and no one has actually done it. For what it's worth, you could avoid the Last-Firsted problem by taking First Player, but only if you are reasonably sure that your opponent has a Fleet where at least one objective does not yield bonus points ... in which case you just pick that objective and enjoy being First Player (much easier to run for 6 Rounds). Although, then you're going full Troll limiting your opponents to 6 Point Wins because as 1st Player you lose the 0-0 tie 5-6.

But the point remains that, given Armada's scoring system, this is a theoretical (though not practical) problem. If you could build a fleet that left over 300pts unspent and had an impossible-to-catch single ship that just avoided the game, you'd walk away with 18 Tournament points across 3 Rounds, which isn't enough to win the event (but maybe you'd prize at T16/T32 prizes), but you sure would get a lot of lulz and anyone who paired against you by sheer chance would basically be knocked out of winning the tournament because they'd be handed a 5 point loss regardless of their own play. If Armada scoring was different, then this wouldn't even be a theoretical problem.

1 minute ago, AllWingsStandyingBy said:

Indeed, which is why it's speculative and no one has actually done it.

But the point remains that, given Armada's scoring system, this is a theoretical (though not practical) problem. If you could build a fleet that left over 300pts unspent and had an impossible-to-catch single ship that just avoided the game, you'd walk away with 18 Tournament points across 3 Rounds, which isn't enough to win the event (but maybe you'd prize at T16/T32 prizes), but you sure would get a lot of lulz and anyone who paired against you by sheer chance would basically be knocked out of winning the tournament because they'd be handed a 5 point loss regardless of their own play. If Armada scoring was different, then this wouldn't even be a theoretical problem.

True. But any TO worth their salt just wouldn't allow the fleet in the first place. Spoilers do nothing to add to the event, and only detract from it.

1 minute ago, AllWingsStandyingBy said:

Indeed, which is why it's speculative and no one has actually done it.

But the point remains that, given Armada's scoring system, this is a theoretical (though not practical) problem. If you could build a fleet that left over 300pts unspent and had an impossible-to-catch single ship that just avoided the game, you'd walk away with 18 Tournament points across 3 Rounds, which isn't enough to win the event (but maybe you'd prize at T16/T32 prizes), but you sure would get a lot of lulz and anyone who paired against you by sheer chance would basically be knocked out of winning the tournament because they'd be handed a 5 point loss regardless of their own play. If Armada scoring was different, then this wouldn't even be a theoretical problem. 

Luckily the activation system shuts it down hard. If you have enough activations not to die to first last, you have things they can catch and kill. Ergo, there is no impossible-to-catch ship capable of winning you the game. Although I kind of want to try six or so ET CR90s with first player now. Kiting for days.

2 minutes ago, Admiral Theia said:

True. But any TO worth their salt just wouldn't allow the fleet in the first place. Spoilers do nothing to add to the event, and only detract from it.

Well, TOs worth their salt are pretty rare to start with (even at FFG Events, I was told last year at Gencon by a TO that my opponent's Slaone prevented my Ace squadrons from spending their other copy of the Brace token... whoops), but that's true across most games (not just an Armada problem).

But if said Player makes this sort of case: "My favorite part of Star Wars is when the plucky hero ship is running from the Big Bad Enemy! I love the thrill of the chase! I want to pretend like I've got the Death Star Plans on my CR90 and if I can get away then the Rebellion will be saved!!!" Conversely, they might note that they only have a very small collection, or that they want the fresh challenge of a new gaming experience playing the mouse versus the cat since they've played so many standard games. Or maybe they just really want the T16 prize and they think this fleet/strategy is their honest best chance?

There's nothing in the rules that prevent such a fleet or such a play style. And I'm pretty sure if the player made appeals to one (or more) of the reasons above, every TO I've ever met would let them play. The burden of proof would be heavily on the TO to justify kicking someone out of the tournament who had brought a perfectly legal list.

17 minutes ago, AllWingsStandyingBy said:

Well, TOs worth their salt are pretty rare to start with (even at FFG Events, I was told last year at Gencon by a TO that my opponent's Slaone prevented my Ace squadrons from spending their other copy of the Brace token... whoops), but that's true across most games (not just an Armada problem).

But if said Player makes this sort of case: "My favorite part of Star Wars is when the plucky hero ship is running from the Big Bad Enemy! I love the thrill of the chase! I want to pretend like I've got the Death Star Plans on my CR90 and if I can get away then the Rebellion will be saved!!!" Conversely, they might note that they only have a very small collection, or that they want the fresh challenge of a new gaming experience playing the mouse versus the cat since they've played so many standard games. Or maybe they just really want the T16 prize and they think this fleet/strategy is their honest best chance?

There's nothing in the rules that prevent such a fleet or such a play style. And I'm pretty sure if the player made appeals to one (or more) of the reasons above, every TO I've ever met would let them play. The burden of proof would be heavily on the TO to justify kicking someone out of the tournament who had brought a perfectly legal list.

You don't have to kick them, just don't allow the list. Above all the TO has a responsibility to the integrity event and to fairness for the players in that event. I used to run poker tournaments for a large poker room. This is the golden rule for tournaments of any stripe. I could counter any of the above arguments handily ("narrative games are great, in fun games, not in a competition", for example). The TO wouldn't need to meet any burden of proof. Now, if every player wanted to let them play the list, I wouldn't stand in the way, but on my own judgement I'd tell them add another ship, play a different list, or drop out, regardless of anything that is or is not in the rules.

37 minutes ago, Admiral Theia said:

You don't have to kick them, just don't allow the list. Above all the TO has a responsibility to the integrity event and to fairness for the players in that event. I used to run poker tournaments for a large poker room. This is the golden rule for tournaments of any stripe. I could counter any of the above arguments handily ("narrative games are great, in fun games, not in a competition", for example). The TO wouldn't need to meet any burden of proof. Now, if every player wanted to let them play the list, I wouldn't stand in the way, but on my own judgement I'd tell them add another ship, play a different list, or drop out, regardless of anything that is or is not in the rules.

We had a Tarkin Raider list turn up to UK Nationals. What would you do in that situation? They flew straight of the table turn 1, collected the participation card and dropped out.

1 hour ago, Admiral Theia said:

You don't have to kick them, just don't allow the list. Above all the TO has a responsibility to the integrity event and to fairness for the players in that event. I used to run poker tournaments for a large poker room. This is the golden rule for tournaments of any stripe. I could counter any of the above arguments handily ("narrative games are great, in fun games, not in a competition", for example). The TO wouldn't need to meet any burden of proof. Now, if every player wanted to let them play the list, I wouldn't stand in the way, but on my own judgement I'd tell them add another ship, play a different list, or drop out, regardless of anything that is or is not in the rules.

I'll be happy to never come across a rule-by-decree TO like you then. With respect, you not allowing a player to play that list (1 CR90, WHATEVER the reason the player has for running it) is not within your powers as a TO. It IS a legal list; full stop. Unless you posted and communicated some condition prior to the event (and it's not an FFG sanctioned Regional or whatever ), such as "All lists must be at least 200 pts, or contain a minimum of 2 ships..." You can't just determine on the spot, willy nilly, that someone's fleet doesn't meet the image in your head for what constitutes a proper list. Back in wave 2 people were pushing initiative bids of up to 50 pts, i'm sure in some fringe cases people went even crazier than that. I'm not sure what the solution is to the larger problem, but I'm certain this is not it.

EDIT: I'll add that I agree a single CR90 whos sole purpose is to buzz around and win 2nd player 6-5 is stupid, most likely selfish, and the most bizarre case of WAAC upsetting strategy I've probably ever seen in a miniature game. That still doesn't justify any TO being allowed to change tournement list building rules on-the-spot after the fact.

Wait... That's brilliant! That's a perfect strategy for me at a regional. 2 Corvettes, Mon Mothma, and a need for speed. I usually give away 8 or 9 points like it's free historically.

On 1/8/2019 at 12:30 PM, AllWingsStandyingBy said:

I've flat out heard a player at an adjacent table say "Well, the only way either of us can make it is if we get 10 points, so I'm just gonna throw the rest of my ships into your fleet since I can't win" and I've similarly seen players play the avoidance/denial game because 5 points is better than 1 point (myself included). Either way, Opponent A has more control over Player A's Score than Player A does. And that strikes me as an inherent weakness in the system, but given that Armada has necessarily so few rounds, there's really probably no better system, sadly.

So I've seen a similar thing happen, on like a table two where both players realize that they could win with a 10-1 but not anything else at the start of the game. They then play trying to get a 10-1 and usually get a 6-5 as they annihilate each other and both get lots of points. As long as the players are not colluding to fix their score, but are pointing out what they need, I don't see an issue with it.

On 1/8/2019 at 12:30 PM, AllWingsStandyingBy said:

Ironic, as this is also why I loathe the Armada system. Clubbing seals with a 10 point win is always way better than narrowly eeking out a 6-5 win over an incredibly good opponent.

As for this, while I've frequently been the one being clubbed, while a 6-5 win is usually a great game and a close win, that also means that both players played about the same and one barely came out ahead (a minor victory you might say in terms from other games).

While on the the contrary, someone who crushes their opponent won a major victory. I like that these are rated differently. It can suck (and I've had it happen a bunch in tournaments for other games) when you've been getting a lot of close victories, but then, as the system only tracks wins, you get paired with someone who's blown out all of their previous opponents. Instead I love the fact that the Armada system allows us to pair people who have been getting 6-5s and 5-6s all tournament against each other, while having the 10-1 players play each other. It also allows those top players to either blow each other away or, to get a 6-5 themselves, and so even out the field.

But again, to each their own. The system definitely has it's flaws, like I pointed out, how someone you barely beat can still win the tournament, but I love the greater ability to match people at similar tournament results, and to give a greater incentive to try and play a better game and score more points.

I was at one event where the top player just needed a 7-4 win to win the tournament. I was playing 3 Vics2's, a Glad kitted out for shield repairs and no squadrons (I know, I know). He had a Rebel bomber heavy list. He was super cocky, so I just deployed in the corner at speed 0 and waited. The first three rounds were spent with him moving across the board. He ended up winning, but barely. A 5-6 loss against a rebel bomber list isn't that bad for a list with slow ships and no squadron defense.

He ended up winning every game, but coming in second due to the soft win he got from me. I've never seen anyone more angry. I don't think he understood how the scoring system worked before, but he definitely did after.

In regards to the original post... having all but three players drop is definitely a failed event. I'd have rescheduled or done a quick 3 man tiebreaker mini tournament.

You can't deploy at speed 0, just an FYI.

Page 10 of Reference: Setup, step 6, bullet 1:

"...When a player places a ship, he must set its speed dial to a speed available on its speed chart"

"0" is not an available speed on any ships' speed chart.

56 minutes ago, Rocmistro said:

You can't deploy at speed 0, just an FYI.

Page 10 of Reference: Setup, step 6, bullet 1:

"...When a player places a ship, he must set its speed dial to a speed available on its speed chart"

"0" is not an available speed on any ships' speed chart.

Speed 1 everything, round one navs for everyone. I believe that's what he means, anyway.

On 1/8/2019 at 1:56 PM, Rocmistro said:

I'll be happy to never come across a rule-by-decree TO like you then. With respect, you not allowing a player to play that list (1 CR90, WHATEVER the reason the player has for running it) is not within your powers as a TO. It IS a legal list; full stop. Unless you posted and communicated some condition prior to the event (and it's not an FFG sanctioned Regional or whatever ), such as "All lists must be at least 200 pts, or contain a minimum of 2 ships..." You can't just determine on the spot, willy nilly, that someone's fleet doesn't meet the image in your head for what constitutes a proper list. Back in wave 2 people were pushing initiative bids of up to 50 pts, i'm sure in some fringe cases people went even crazier than that. I'm not sure what the solution is to the larger problem, but I'm certain this is not it.

EDIT: I'll add that I agree a single CR90 whos sole purpose is to buzz around and win 2nd player 6-5 is stupid, most likely selfish, and the most bizarre case of WAAC upsetting strategy I've probably ever seen in a miniature game. That still doesn't justify any TO being allowed to change tournement list building rules on-the-spot after the fact.

You might note that I said “unless the players are okay with it”. The person bringing that list is, at best, a spoiler, and I would be doing a disservice to my other players, who came in good faith, to not address the obvious, near certainty of a problem and bad feelings about the event. It is not hyperbolic to say that such a thing can kill the tournament scene at a location. I run 6-8 tournaments a year at my store, and I don’t want players driven off by a spoiler. If you’re just after the participation prize, there are plenty. Pay the entry fee, come back in seven hours, and pick up your prize. No need to ruin the event for those who came to play and compete.

Invoke power of the TO, and play a match with player 2 to give them a fair chance.

Hypothetically speaking Player 1 and Player 2 are alergic to Peanuts and run for the hills at the sight of the death sandwich giving player 3 the tournament win.