And they spent *counts* 149-ish points to kill your 25 point flotilla (throwing in a minimum points Hondo-Gozanti).
Also as first player...why didn't you just move it? Varnillian can only stock a double if she's Second Player meaning you have activation priority.
Or..don't deploy on the front edge of your deployment, and you won't even be in range.
1 hour ago, DarthRulesLawyer said:Well, most of you are not playing against optimal Cataclysm builds.
How do you know?
Edited by Alzer40 minutes ago, Alzer said:How do you know?
From the tone of his post you can tell he KNOWS.
1 hour ago, DarthRulesLawyer said:Well, most of you are not playing against optimal Cataclysm builds. All they need to do is dial in a firepower command and roll 3 blanks + double hit + accuracy (or better). Sensor team spend a blank to get a second accuracy, Gunner Chief Varnillian to switch out a blank with a double hit. 4 hits and 2 accuracies and boom, your flotilla and all of its upgrades are gone.
And if they don't get all four they have Intel officer to take a token and make darn sure they'll get you next turn.
And not all fleets can just "split up". Your completely removing them from the meta.
Cataclysm needs banning. Everything else with the onager is probably okay.
Dude, take a breath. I get that some builds can be frustrating. And Cataclysm and its accompanying build can definitely be frustrating. But it's also not broken. It's just a trap one needs to learn how to avoid. Admittedly, it's a lot harder to avoid said trap if you're tilting. Given how angry you seem to be about the title, it's possible tilting is part of the problem. I think the fellas over at CGYSO have some solid thoughts about that.
http://cannotgetyourshipout.blogspot.com/2017/07/tilting-and-you.html?m=1
On 10/20/2020 at 3:41 AM, Ginkapo said:There is zero ambiguity, simply people who dont read the rulebook which is pretty short.
I think people read the rule book - I think it's hard for some folks to keep everything in their mind, especially about "effects use & timing" until theyve learned to do it the right way because theyve done it correctly over and over and over again. Everyone learns differently.
Remembering things is for droids
Truthfully, I don't know what to tell the OP, other than to take stock of the things that you can change and those you can't.
To attribute it to an experience in my local meta, the second the SSD got announced we had a player who out and out started saying how much they hated that it was being added to the game and that they would refuse to play against it upon release. I haven't seen them around since, which is a shame because outside of that one instance which they decided was a non-starter for them, they were a pleasant and enjoyable person to play against. Problem was, the genie was out of the bottle for the SSD and, no matter how upset they were over it, there was no putting it back in once it hit tables.
FFG isn't going to do a mass recall on a ship or a card without widespread issue; and from what I've seen and experienced, Cataclysm isn't seeing that kind of issues. I can understand if this is a direct counter to the way you normally play your list, but demanding for the devs to ban it isn't likely to bear fruit. The best you can do is to analyse where exactly Cataclysm is hitting your list's weak-spot and plug that hole. That's something that
you
have direct control over and can change (and believe me, it can be done).
TLDR: between adapting one's strategy to a seemingly unfair strategy and quitting the game until it's fixed or banned, you're way better off adapting.
Its worth noting that there are other things available that can be an 'npe' if your particular list is weak against them or you arent expecting it. Bt avenger, yavaris riekan, and token f@king lists all come to mind immediately, there are of course more.
Moreso, cataclysm is to some extent a counter to some of these, which brings more healthy diversity to the game.
[double post]
Edited by DarthRulesLawyer[double post]
Edited by DarthRulesLawyerAnything that shoots outside of range 3 was a bad idea imo. It unfairly punishes one side more for wanting to play the game. Players are going to get really good at the cataclysm - manipulating speed, dropping to 0, and just pummeling anybody who actually wants to approach. That's terrible for the game.
I respect everybody's opinion and appreciate your input. Honestly I am a little surprised that not one other person has agreed with me. But I am also glad this permanent record of my dissenting opinion will be stored in the vault of this forum as I believe it will vindicate me over time haha.
Edited by DarthRulesLawyer3 hours ago, DarthRulesLawyer said:Anything that shoots outside of range 3 was a bad idea imo. It unfairly punishes one side more for wanting to play the game. Players are going to get really good at the cataclysm - manipulating speed, dropping to 0, and just pummeling anybody who actually wants to approach. That's terrible for the game.
I respect everybody's opinion and appreciate your input. Honestly I am a little surprised that not one other person has agreed with me. But I am also glad this permanent record of my dissenting opinion will be stored in the vault of this forum as I believe it will vindicate me over time haha.
I don't like the Onager, especially with catalyst, either. However the main problem that I see is that it messes with the activation asymmetry of the game. Second player advantage has never been great. Thanks to the Onager it even deteriorated.
Normally, it is up to the first player to engage early. Several objectives enforce that. Those objectives have been seriously devaluated.
3 hours ago, DarthRulesLawyer said:Anything that shoots outside of range 3 was a bad idea imo. It unfairly punishes one side more for wanting to play the game. Players are going to get really good at the cataclysm - manipulating speed, dropping to 0, and just pummeling anybody who actually wants to approach. That's terrible for the game.
I respect everybody's opinion and appreciate your input. Honestly I am a little surprised that not one other person has agreed with me. But I am also glad this permanent record of my dissenting opinion will be stored in the vault of this forum as I believe it will vindicate me over time haha.
Sometimes when you hold a view and most other people disagree you're a visionary genius. Sometimes you're just holding it wrong. It's good to be open to either of those possibilities.
4 hours ago, DarthRulesLawyer said:I respect everybody's opinion and appreciate your input. Honestly I am a little surprised that not one other person has agreed with me. But I am also glad this permanent record of my dissenting opinion will be stored in the vault of this forum as I believe it will vindicate me over time haha.
I think the reason more people haven’t agreed with you is because people are already learning how to counter it, and realize it’s not as game-breaking as it once seemed.
Whenever something new comes out, a lot people start calling it an “NPE” or “game-breaking.” People freaked out over how Pryce and 2-ship ruined the game, the SSD was going to be unkillable, etc. It’s part of the circle of Armada life: something new comes out, somebody finds a way to exploit it, everybody starts copying it and it becomes a big part of the meta, people learn how to counter it, it starts dropping from the meta, then something else new comes out.
5 hours ago, DarthRulesLawyer said:Anything that shoots outside of range 3 was a bad idea imo. It unfairly punishes one side more for wanting to play the game. Players are going to get really good at the cataclysm - manipulating speed, dropping to 0, and just pummeling anybody who actually wants to approach. That's terrible for the game.
I respect everybody's opinion and appreciate your input. Honestly I am a little surprised that not one other person has agreed with me. But I am also glad this permanent record of my dissenting opinion will be stored in the vault of this forum as I believe it will vindicate me over time haha.
Oh I agreed that Cataclysm can be an NPE. Stated as much in my first post. I disagree that it is an insurmountable challenge that must be removed from the game. Lists can be built to adapt to the tactic. Many folks considered the SSD a negative play experience (until it just disapeared as soon as the Onager and Hawk arrived). I personally consider Dodonna to be a negative play experience. I decide to take DCOs on more of my ships to not have to deal with him.
Your issue is more that you came in raving and ranting, pointing your finger at everyone to blame but your own inability to adjust. Essentially basing your arguments on what appears to be positive dice luck (and basic list-making skills) on the part of your opponents. You've made blanket statements not only about the game but about the quality/intelligence of opponents that we as members of other communities face. It's going to get you some push back purely on tone.
Avoid pre-emptively patting yourself on the back. Smugness is not a virtue.
53 minutes ago, Alzer said:I personally consider Dodonna to be a negative play experience. I decide to take DCOs on more of my ships to not have to deal with him.
I'm just checking in to make sure you know that DCO does not mitigate Dodonna directly. I'm assuming you mean to stop APTs so Dodonna is less likely to trigger. But just confirming that you know Dodonna is not directly countered by DCO.
Just now, Irate Pooka said:I'm just checking in to make sure you know that DCO does not mitigate Dodonna directly. I'm assuming you mean to stop APTs so Dodonna is less likely to trigger. But just confirming that you know Dodonna is not directly countered by DCO.
Wait, DCO doesn't make you immune to crits!?
😛
Yes, I meant against APTs/ Dodonna's Pride/ XX9s ( gags ) etc in combination with Dodonna. I am aware of how Contain interacts with him normally.
10 minutes ago, Irate Pooka said:I'm just checking in to make sure you know that DCO does not mitigate Dodonna directly. I'm assuming you mean to stop APTs so Dodonna is less likely to trigger. But just confirming that you know Dodonna is not directly countered by DCO.
Sort of a semantic difference, isnt it? If he has the contain for DCO, he has the contain to stop basic crit effects.
10 minutes ago, Alzer said:Wait, DCO doesn't make you immune to crits!?
😛
Yes, I meant against APTs/ Dodonna's Pride/ XX9s ( gags ) etc in combination with Dodonna. I am aware of how Contain interacts with him normally.
Got it, use XX9s against @Alzer , make him ragequit.
To the OP, I would bet that when Onager was first announced and initially released there were other folks with similar feelings about it. However, it’s been out a while now and I don’t think that players who have experience with or against it are clamoring in the forums about how broken it is. Perhaps a better tact would be to say, “Hey, [this thing] seems really game breaking to me. What are your experiences with it? How have you adapted to it? What am i not seeing?”
16 minutes ago, geek19 said:Got it, use XX9s against @Alzer , make him ragequit.
XX9s on Mon Karren! Go ahead and use DCO, cause you're not bracing!
32 minutes ago, Alzer said:Wait, DCO doesn't make you immune to crits!?
😛
Yes, I meant against APTs/ Dodonna's Pride/ XX9s ( gags ) etc in combination with Dodonna. I am aware of how Contain interacts with him normally.
Ok, cool. Just checking. Given that there are fundamental misunderstandings of rules in this thread already, just wanted to confirm. Like I originally said, I figured this was the case.
24 minutes ago, Madaghmire said:Sort of a semantic difference, isnt it? If he has the contain for DCO, he has the contain to stop basic crit effects.
I mean, semantics is the basis for a bunch of rules debates and arguments that have absolutely obsessed the FFG Armada forum since we've had little to discuss without organized play or actual releases. I just wanted to confirm there wasn't a misunderstanding of the rules. I know I was real upset to learn I'd cheated by using Hondo to relocate a squadron on top of an obstacle to kill it. It wouldn't have changed the outcome of the game, but it still bothered me that I'd gotten such a basic rule wrong.
8 hours ago, DarthRulesLawyer said:Anything that shoots outside of range 3 was a bad idea imo. It unfairly punishes one side more for wanting to play the game. Players are going to get really good at the cataclysm - manipulating speed, dropping to 0, and just pummeling anybody who actually wants to approach. That's terrible for the game.
I respect everybody's opinion and appreciate your input. Honestly I am a little surprised that not one other person has agreed with me. But I am also glad this permanent record of my dissenting opinion will be stored in the vault of this forum as I believe it will vindicate me over time haha.
To add some suggestions I'm not yet seeing in the thread:
Dust Clouds. If you're second player you can force your opponent to choose them, and they cast a nice big shadow that Onager can't do anything about. For extra fun, bring Ezra and move a dust cloud with you for a turn.
Ravager. (It's my own minority opinion this ship was bad for a flexible meta, but anyway.) Ravager starts off closer to Cataclysm, laughs off the first shot, and drinks a big mug of Onager tears in a later round. Some extra defensive Starhawk builds can pull this off too (I once had a Hawk eat Onager shots for 5 rounds, but there was a Pelta feeding it shields, EST and repairs so it did not care.)
Activation advantage (not to be confused with first player.) If Cataclysm can't make a small base go first, it can't hit that target.
Stupidly high bids. Bid 30 points and take an MC30 or a long-range Raddus drop off of Profundity. If they need initiative, there are fleets that can take it away.
Rogues. Now Cataclysm has to make something happen (unless it brought an equally committed squadron wing) and you have zero obligation to engage. Heck, you can deploy sideways.
On 10/22/2020 at 12:09 PM, The Jabbawookie said:Rogues. Now Cataclysm has to make something happen (unless it brought an equally committed squadron wing) and you have zero obligation to engage. Heck, you can deploy sideways.
Bring in those 8 YT-2400s, haha!
