22 minutes ago, Bertie Wooster said:

He didn't say "even out," he said "smooth out just a little bit" and "counterbalance that just a little bit." If the number of activations were evened, that would be a drastic change. See above, my example of 7 CR90s vs. 2 ships with squads. 5 pass tokens for the 2-ship list? Insane. But what if it's just 1? Or maybe 1 for the CR90 list, and 2 for the 2-ship list? I'm not sure how it'll work, but I'm hopeful that they've learned from studying tournaments a way to make it fun.

Let's just think about that for a moment. You don't have Pryce, but get 5 pass tokens. So 1 turn, your choice, you can go last, but otherwise, you are in the same position. ALternatively, you can try to pass 1-2 times in a turn for several turns but still, probably not meaningful enough since they can choose their activation order. Finally it would be worth having MSU, meanwhile using them well timed, the tokens could give opportunities to a skilled player with lower activations.

What about giving a player 1 pass token for every 2 squadrons included in his list ? That would remove the forced need to buy flotillas in order to win the activation mini-game ; and it would make a medium fighter screen with generic squadrons gain some viability. Combined with the ace cap, this would make swarms of generic cheap fighters have some value. MSU lists would stay ok as long as they include squads.

2 hours ago, Duellist12 said:

. MSU lists would stay ok as long as they include squads.

That's a point to concern about. Everything would be ok as long as they include squads. Well, right now everything is ok as long as they include flotillas... And flotillas don't give deployments as cheap as squadrons do.

On 8/27/2020 at 1:53 PM, Bertie Wooster said:

1. Yes, they're trying to mitigate last-first advantage

2. Pass tokens are expendable, so you'll have to decide when to use them.
3. Players won't feel like they have to bring upgrades to give them an activation advantage.

He didn't say "even out," he said "smooth out just a little bit" and "counterbalance that just a little bit." If the number of activations were evened, that would be a drastic change.

Thanks for writing it out. Lets hope for the best, even if it sounds a bit like polititian lingo.

I just dont understand why low activation lists need an activation advantage at all, they havent had much issue recently (Although that was with Bail/Pryce around) and have other strengths that high act lists dont have. Salvo and the new objectives also help vs last firsting lists.

11 hours ago, RapidReload said:

Thanks for writing it out. Lets hope for the best, even if it sounds a bit like polititian lingo.

I just dont understand why low activation lists need an activation advantage at all, they havent had much issue recently (Although that was with Bail/Pryce around) and have other strengths that high act lists dont have. Salvo and the new objectives also help vs last firsting lists.

I'm hopeful it'll work out, but I understand your concern. Starhawk 134 does fine with just 3 activations--does it really need to be more powerful? Or Cataclysm/Squall/Goz...

On the other hand, I remember high activation Ackbar/Defiance lists before SAd/Bail/Pryce that could be pretty annoying to play against. I could see a pass token rule taking some wind out of their sails.

We'll just have to wait and see how it works!

In my opinion anything that reduce the gimmick and rather easy last/first advantage is a win in my book. Having more activation should still stay competitive as long as you can't pass every turn, just the most pivotal turns become equal. I think the game is better off if you win them by playing and not by constructing a gimmick list that only really work if you are first player and have more activation's than the opponent.

Something that can often be extremely OP and too easy to pull of is large squadron alpha strikes when you get to do last/first... there is almost nothing you can do against these. Even with a passing rule it is hard to defend against this in practice.

I will welcome this change to the game. Sure... you can defend against last first gimmicks but it means you have to play very passive and games can end up a bit boring where you just circle each other, depends on the objectives.

9 hours ago, jorgen_cab said:

Something that can often be extremely OP and too easy to pull of is large squadron alpha strikes when you get to do last/first... there is almost nothing you can do against these. Even with a passing rule it is hard to defend against this in practice.

The passing rule makes it harder to defend. The reason squadron first lasts are a thing is Pryce; otherwise you’d be somehow spending 130+ points, bidding to go first and out-activating your opponent.

Now you don’t need more activations. Maybe some rogues and a bid.

1 hour ago, The Jabbawookie said:

The passing rule makes it harder to defend. The reason squadron first lasts are a thing is Pryce; otherwise you’d be somehow spending 130+ points, bidding to go first and out-activating your opponent.

Now you don’t need more activations. Maybe some rogues and a bid.

This is one reason we simply for the most part randomise (don't use bids) who get's to choose first or second player and why I tend to like campaign games more and sometimes throw in the odd random objective cards to fight over as well. Make for far more interesting Armada games as you can't tailor your fleet too much and need to leave some dynamic options available most of the time. But that is just what we do to make it more fun and balanced.

There also is a way to force squadron engagements to prevent the last/first... you sometimes have to do that. Force the opponent to engage you early or you drop it on them first by moving up in the squadron phase to be in range to engage next turn. If they are first player they have to activate an move in or you do in return. There always are options even if they are not optimal... sometimes you have to choose between a bad and another bad choice or force the opponent to do it is better.

In regards to Pryce and Bail I would not be surprised if these cards change somewhat in the update. I still also think this is a gimmick move that can quite easily be shut down as you telegraph your intentions even before you set your ships on the board.

6 hours ago, jorgen_cab said:

In regards to Pryce and Bail I would not be surprised if these cards change somewhat in the update.

Apparently Pryce, Bail, and Strategic Advisor aren't going to be in the Upgrade Card Collection (which makes me sad because I was hoping to see them make use of the blue bar - but not really for any other reason). It's very curious, though, especially in light of some kind of pass token proliferation.

5 hours ago, FreakinUnoriginal said:

Apparently Pryce, Bail, and Strategic Advisor aren't going to be in the Upgrade Card Collection (which makes me sad because I was hoping to see them make use of the blue bar - but not really for any other reason). It's very curious, though, especially in light of some kind of pass token proliferation.

Make sense for them to be made obsolete as there are new mechanics to replace their effects. Pryce and Bail might appear with different effects later on, but their current use probably is obsolete in 1.5.

20 hours ago, jorgen_cab said:

This is one reason we simply for the most part randomise (don't use bids) who get's to choose first or second player and why I tend to like campaign games more and sometimes throw in the odd random objective cards to fight over as well. Make for far more interesting Armada games as you can't tailor your fleet too much and need to leave some dynamic options available most of the time. But that is just what we do to make it more fun and balanced.

Makes sense to play the game so you have the most fun if you play at home. If you wanna play tournaments you are forced to play by the rules. It would be nice if empire/rebellion..., all fleet archetypes, ships,... had basically fair chances if embedded in a reasonable strategy.

8 minutes ago, RapidReload said:

Makes sense to play the game so you have the most fun if you play at home. If you wanna play tournaments you are forced to play by the rules. It would be nice if empire/rebellion..., all fleet archetypes, ships,... had basically fair chances if embedded in a reasonable strategy.

There is a reason I NEVER play tournaments in ANY games... I almost never play 100% by the rules...

I don't want to stray too far away from the core of the game... just more narrative games so no Rebel versus Rebels or Darth Vader against Darth Vader nonsense, that would make me faint, the theme and role-play are too important to me even in a hard strategy game...