4 hours ago, player3691565 said:

I think they could have taken the opportunity to:

1) make some minor modifications to the main ship cards of the bastard children that really do suffer and are hidden in the card binder: neb Bs really needed 2 shields on its sides or a redirect ( those sides are two big and one shield two little). Victory just needs an extra click and the interdiction just needed a wee bit more damage output to justify the cost.

I mean we already have the Auxillary shield techs for the Neb shields.

I think the Combat Interdictor could use some help too though.

1 hour ago, TallGiraffe said:

I mean we already have the Auxillary shield techs for the Neb shields.

I think the Combat Interdictor could use some help too though.

@Ginkapo :

This is exactly my point. Aux Shield Techs and Harrow and Vanguard are “fix” cards, and we didn’t need fix cards, we needed fixes applied to the ships directly. They had the chance to do it, and didn’t. Just as they didn’t do a lot of things. So anyway, I think I didn’t adequately explain why I felt this thread should prompt these frustrated responses from me. In my mind, all of these things are interrelated, and the things I was bringing up are relevant to the conversation about Harrow and Vanguard.

Apologies if I didn’t make myself clear, or if you feel these issues are too far afield.

17 hours ago, Cpt ObVus said:

I honestly am rather annoyed at the whole “Armada 1.5” concept. They were presented with an opportunity to accomplish a vast and sweeping 2.0 reboot which could have:

A) done points and upgrade slots online (like X-Wing; it’s a vastly superior model).

B) fixed even more broken/useless cards, commanders, and ships

C) also given us standard sized cards, evade token and squadron rules changes, and all the fixes and balance corrections they already gave us.

Instead, I feel like we got a half-assed effort that might make Leia, Konstantine and Tarkin a bit more playable, but didn’t do half of what it should have done.

Maybe I’m wrong, and maybe it will be awesome once it’s all on the table. I hope that’s the case.

16 hours ago, CaribbeanNinja said:

You are. In my opinion of course.

Not to continue to hijack the original post, but to answer your take on 1.5:

We got a lot. Armada was already a great game. A 1.5 lets us keep the bones we love without wrecking everything all at once. It is already quite a lot:

Pass token activation changes and SA\Bail\Pryce elimination

Two new factions (That now have to be balanced in to the game forever more)

A living rules document(That may allow for quicker changes and errata and faq a la Legion)

Evade token changes

Ace Fleet building change

Intel change

Loads of upgrade changes (that EACH have to be balanced within the existing structure)

The thing I take most exception to is calling the effort 'half-assed' . There are always going to be some issues with things, but at this moment (with the exception of some physical issues with the product) the whole endeavor seems like a great success. I have never seen such excitement for the game locally or online.

I would agree more with the first poster above then the later. At a very least I would have thought all cards that needed it, should have been rebalanced points wise. It was the perfect opportunity with a card reprint. Now things will probably get rebalanced every 6 months and we’re not starting at zero (so to speak), there are some cards that are over and under priced. It doesn’t pay to do things half way, though I do like most of the changes in 1.5.

17 hours ago, Ophion said:

I really like both these titles but it feels a bit bad that they are associated fluff wise with only one particular ship.

I think they would have been better as a new vsd/neb b variant. Call them 'VSD - Harrow class refit' or something.

Vanguard with local fire control is great fun, id like the ability to run a couple in that config. The only problem with this idea is that in practice everyone would just use it to put flight controllers on yavaris...

Anyway, just a thought.

As for the idea of there being a class of ship and it having a unique ship card, I don’t think it’s necessary now. With the increase in size of upgrade cards, it is possible to depict more changes on the upgrade cards themselves even to the point where a title card could depict a new and unique maneuver chart or defensive token layout for the titled ship. If there is enough of a change, I’m sure a new ship card would be warranted, like in the case of the newer(ish) ISDs. Though I’m not a fan of the uniform sized cards, it does open more possibilities in design space and allows for a larger rule set or depiction (in the case of the movement chart) on upgrade cards themselves. I just hope the design team takes advantage.

1 hour ago, JediPartisan said:

I would agree more with the first poster above then the later. At a very least I would have thought all cards that needed it, should have been rebalanced points wise. It was the perfect opportunity with a card reprint. Now things will probably get rebalanced every 6 months and we’re not starting at zero (so to speak), there are some cards that are over and under priced. It doesn’t pay to do things half way, though I do like most of the changes in 1.5.

It definitely does. The less card they change, the more balanced the whole thing will be. We have half a year to test out all the secondary effects of the upgrade card nerfs and commander buffs.

6 month from now, we might have an overhaul of the underperforming cards too mixing things up again.

The meta shifted through longer periods of time without any new releases lately. I don't understand why can't people accept smaller changes in shorter times. If 2 years was enough to test out things and still find new broken builds (ahhem 2-ship) maybe you can too have fun for half a year with only "half-effort" changes.

Armada is pretty balanced because of his slow life cycle. Even with all these outlier cards, it wasn't much of an issue. Now, it will be even more variety among fleets. Let's see first how it turns out, before you start demanding more and more.

1 hour ago, Rimsen said:

It definitely does. The less card they change, the more balanced the whole thing will be. We have half a year to test out all the secondary effects of the upgrade card nerfs and commander buffs.

6 month from now, we might have an overhaul of the underperforming cards too mixing things up again.

The meta shifted through longer periods of time without any new releases lately. I don't understand why can't people accept smaller changes in shorter times. If 2 years was enough to test out things and still find new broken builds (ahhem 2-ship) maybe you can too have fun for half a year with only "half-effort" changes.

Armada is pretty balanced because of his slow life cycle. Even with all these outlier cards, it wasn't much of an issue. Now, it will be even more variety among fleets. Let's see first how it turns out, before you start demanding more and more.

Upgrade cards that are currently under and over priced will still be under or overpriced after the current changes. Armada is probably the best balanced out of the three Star Wars games, but that doesn’t mean there aren’t cards that are never used, that wouldn’t benefit from a points rebalance. Also the slow release you’re suggesting is not a good idea. It’s not like AMG can send out a card reprint every time they change the card cost. I really hope you weren’t expecting that.
I can tell you with absolute certainty that your cautious attitude is not shared by game companies when there is a release to be created and sent out. Yes testing is done, but it can’t take very long in the release time frame. So yes, what I’m suggesting is the better approach so that the new cards everyone just purchased remain correct and don’t have to be changed again through errata in only a few months.

2 hours ago, JediPartisan said:

Upgrade cards that are currently under and over priced will still be under or overpriced after the current changes. Armada is probably the best balanced out of the three Star Wars games, but that doesn’t mean there aren’t cards that are never used, that wouldn’t benefit from a points rebalance. Also the slow release you’re suggesting is not a good idea. It’s not like AMG can send out a card reprint every time they change the card cost. I really hope you weren’t expecting that.
I can tell you with absolute certainty that your cautious attitude is not shared by game companies when there is a release to be created and sent out. Yes testing is done, but it can’t take very long in the release time frame. So yes, what I’m suggesting is the better approach so that the new cards everyone just purchased remain correct and don’t have to be changed again through errata in only a few months.

Juet because not all cards got eeworked doesn't mean it's half done. Your approach pretty much means that change all the cards for good, then leave it that way. Great. No more Upgrade pack, because they already did all the cards. Good job. If something becomes broken, we can start patching it by new releaeses which come rarely.

You just said it's not tested probably enough and I also think players will find ways to play that testers didn't think about (Again 2 ship pryce).

If you want them to be done with it:

- we wont get more changes (because they did all the cards, why would they revisit them again, besides some broken outliers)

- we would have got the pack maybe 6 month later, or more

- if something is broken it stays that way for a long time. Especially overbuffed cards that someone surely finds a new way to exploit. Then what, errata it again? Great idea.

These are all worse than the current alow approach. So no, it would have been terrible idea, to do "all the work" and call it that.

Also, who cares about card reprint. We had plenty of erratas before which ACTUALLY COME UP IN GAMEPLAY not just fleet building, which is handled by constantly updated fleet builders mostly. So telling it's a bad approach because it's not on the card is totally irrelevant.

So no, your approach carries more risks, needs more work (thus more expensive) and the benefits are at best questionable or irrelevant.

16 hours ago, Cpt ObVus said:

@Ginkapo :

This is exactly my point. Aux Shield Techs and Harrow and Vanguard are “fix” cards, and we didn’t need fix cards, we needed fixes applied to the ships directly. They had the chance to do it, and didn’t. Just as they didn’t do a lot of things. So anyway, I think I didn’t adequately explain why I felt this thread should prompt these frustrated responses from me. In my mind, all of these things are interrelated, and the things I was bringing up are relevant to the conversation about Harrow and Vanguard.

Apologies if I didn’t make myself clear, or if you feel these issues are too far afield.

I don't know. There's a difference between a ship which is too expensive for what it does and one which is flawed in its design or conception.

The Vic is (for me) just about fine except for the point cost. I would like the Vic1 to be 70 pts and Vic2 about 77 pts.

It's a good solid weapons platform with good defence tokens and its major weakness, maneuverability, is not difficult to fix.

Harrow is a lovely title, and changes the Vic1 in to a more evil Demolisher. A couple more interesting titles, and p pointa reductions for the others (particularly my beloved Dominator) would solve its problems.

Contrast with the Interdictor Combat Refit which is worse at everything the 3pt cheaper Suppression variant does.

It actually needs redesigning whereas the Vic doesn't, it just needs a points reduction. I have thought for a long time that it needs a Weapon team but I also think double Ion Cannon slots would be appropriate rather than an Ion and Turbolaser slot. Imagine putting Fire Control Team and double Ion crit cards in it...

I think I need to remind everyone that Dominator is still criminally 12 points and still saps your precious shields.

1 hour ago, flatpackhamster said:

There's a difference between a ship which is too expensive for what it does and one which is flawed in its design or conception.

I don't know if I even agree with that.

Who would take a Combat Interdictor for 50 points? Just about everyone?

Then a points change can fix it and it's too expensive.