Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Hockeyzombie

  1. On 6/12/2017 at 3:06 AM, xerpo said:

    Inadequacy makes you ask for things beyond undertsanding. Inadequacy allows you to learn humbly. I'd rather take Inadequacy, after all.



    I would say "inadequacy of thought" seems more like the lack of ability or desire to properly think things out. Not a lack of knowledge, but an inability to do much with any knowledge. I'm not saying that necessarily applies to anyone. 

  2. 16 hours ago, Visovics said:

    ISDs should have a rule on that style on an insta-kill, Scariff showed how anything from GR-75s to other ISDs are destroyed by the spear-headed ship

    That would be fun, large ships ramming flotillas to death. Wouldn't really solve tournament issues but it'd be fun for less competitive games.

  3. 2 hours ago, Warlord Zepnick said:

    What about making flotillas only have 1 squadron value?


    I was thinking they shouldn't count as ships when checking to see if you still have ships on the table. So you can run five flotillas and a Demolisher but you're tabled if Demolisher dies. Most of the problems people talk about stem from the excessive number of flotillas, so this adds an element of extreme risk to trying to play the lists people want gone from the competitive scene. It also doesn't require changing the text on any cards, since it just gets added to the rules just like "flotillas don't issue a damage card when colliding with a non-flotilla ship" did. 

  4. Most of my lists are somewhat descriptive, like Black Dice or Area Control. My Corellian Conflict lists are also pretty straightforward (CC2 Bombers, CC2 Interdictor). It's easier to keep track that way.

  5. On 5/19/2017 at 3:42 AM, chr335 said:

    I must have missed paraGoombaSlayer.  I was around driving admiralnelson but was just lurkin.  

    Not unless you also visit the X-Wing forums. He was on there a lot, constantly raging about turrets and basically any half-decent list he didn't like. Also the prequels. I'm pretty sure he has a condition or something, it isn't normal to get that angry over a miniatures game. He got banned from not only the forums but also most/all of the local stores where he lived. Last time I saw him he was on Reddit, ranting about how we banned him from our hugbox for being right too often. Cause, you know, it's not the FFG admins who ban people and it couldn't possibly have been his incredibly toxic attitude and hostility to new players. 

  6. On 5/16/2017 at 5:08 AM, xerpo said:

    This is just a nother "friendly" cry from another Imperial player. The more they are, the lauder you can hear the cry. Go rebel, fly all that you think is so OP, dont just bring us local tournament data, and you will see is not as OP as you try to sell us here. And if you want to fix something, start by TIE DEF.

    ...You understand the data is coming largely from ****ing Worlds, right? And the list that has people upset absolutely dominated it. The only counter anyone's found is "play the same thing and do it better," which is pretty clear proof given how long people have had to develop a counter. 

  7. They'd most likely be part of a second campaign like the Corellian Conflict, and only playable in that. I'm picturing different planets having different facilities, and if you capture the right planets you can build those ships (which cost more points than they would for their real faction--Rebel ISD II is like 127 points for example). Alternatively it could be a special objective like Hyperlane Raid and Show of Force. Kill a ship and you can add a weaker version of it to one of your lists. Maybe the more decisive your victory, the better the ship or something. I can't see it happening in the regular game as a standard thing. We may see cross-faction ships in the future but there won't be a time when you can theoretically take any ship in your list. They'll limit it to ships that were used heavily by both sides, or are famous for being in one faction but technically belong to the other. 


    Likely candidates are the Quasar and CR90. The Quasar because of Rebels and apparently the Empire used to use CR90s a lot before they developed the Raider. 

  8. So why include accuracy if they're exclusively for targeting ships? I would get it if these could be used against fighters but it seems pointless if they can't. I guess it's better than a blank, but still. If you're overhauling may as well do it right.


    Also I think this would be a terrible idea. It makes the barrier to entry for new players even higher, and really we could fix the same problem by adding an Offensive Retrofit that's actually good at killing squadrons and nerfing Intel. Or they could say that Escort stops working when the squadron has taken damage equal to its hull value, that shuts down some troublesome synergy. 

  9. 9 hours ago, Truthiness said:

    I love squads, but please no. We've got enough to hold us for a good while. I'd be happy if I didn't see another full squadron pack until wave 9+

    I'm with this guy. I wouldn't object to a wave that was light on squadrons that can hurt ships, though. More fighter options would be fine. But I don't think we need additional bombers right now. 

  10. Most of these look a bit unnecessary, to be honest. I do like the change to Rieekan, although he's still troublesome with any unique squadron that has Escort. I guess they could just issue an errata that says Escort stops working if you die, or that Rieekan doesn't work on anything with that ability. I also like the Engine Techs change. I'm not sure Yavaris needs to be an exhaust effect but that might be because I have very little faith in a Nebulon to survive any real hostility, so I tend to look at anything a Nebulon does through a lens of "but it'll die soon, so it's okay."

  11. 1 hour ago, DOMSWAT911 said:

    War is by nature... unfair :P

    Bring me the Unique Quasar for the Reb's and the number you want in your fleet for the Imp's :)

    Is it really going to be worth having two in an Imperial fleet? They look pretty frail. That would be a lot of squadron activations, but two Quasars seems both redundant and very, very easy to kill with anything that can get near them. As always it depends on how many points they cost and how many upgrades you want to put on them, but even with the cheapest guess I've heard they look like 80+ easy points if you can catch them out of position. For two of them, I mean. 

  12. On 5/13/2017 at 9:18 PM, Vetnor said:

    I would like to add that I'm playing a lot of Armada and no one in our group is playing these "meta" fleets, we're still having fun and we're still winning with what would be consisdered "losing" fleets. 

    So IMHO all this fuss is with highly competitive fleets an doesn't impact on my games so I'm not all that fussed........yet  


    Same here, but it's still an issue for people that do play in competitive metas or attend tournaments. It may not be our problems, but it's still enough of a problem to require some kind of response from FFG. 


    Anyway, limiting the number of flotillas in a fleet and/or making them not count as ships on the table seem like solid approaches. A friend suggested they could go so far as to limit you to flotillas based on the largest ship in your fleet--small ships only get one flotilla, if you have a medium you get two, and if you have a large ship you can have three flotillas. His logic was that the more you invest in one big beast of a ship the more you need cheap activations to make your list functional. I also suggested changing Reeikan to ignore any abilities on squadrons and unique upgrades on ships. That makes unique Escorts less frustrating because they're just an attack with four dice, not an unkillable bullet sponge. Also limits a few of the stronger ships that his lists like. Doesn't do anything to ramming lists, though. Maybe a zombie ship can't resolve commands or command-dependant upgrades like Engine Techs. That would solve the ramming list issue, and probably wouldn't weaken Reeikan too much? I don't know for sure, I've never played with or against a ramming list.

  13. 8 hours ago, BrobaFett said:

    There's no point in arguing because that's how it's played. If you have a TO that decides to ignore the FAQ, clarification from the designer, and standing floor ruling at worlds (which all are in harmony) he too would be wrong.

    You don't have to like it. You wouldn't be the only one. But thems the rules so we can stop talking like it's in question.

    No need to get upset. I'm not really seeing this in the FAQ, and I haven't seen any clarifications from the developers or any rulings from worlds. Not saying that they didn't clarify/rule it that way, just that I haven't seen them and didn't watch worlds. Based purely on reading the card and the FAQ it doesn't look like it works that way. That said if the developers have clarified that it's supposed to work like that then I guess it does. 

  14. 4 minutes ago, BrobaFett said:

    Make sure to acompany with bicylce bells and oogah horns while you activate.

    Its a fun trick, but like Ard said, its a gonna be seen from a mile away and parking a squadron on the front corners of the ship you want to bomb is going to ruin your night. And now your spending even more points to make it work on top the fact Yavaris could be using that token to have something double attack and is instead pushing a lame HWK.


    Also the list has almost no real way to do damage. A few CR90s and two bombers aren't going to last long once the other player gets a few shots in. Demolisher could come screaming in and smash up pretty much anything except the flotillas. There's no cover at all against enemy bombers, unless he abandons his RLB strategy (and two fighters won't hold out long). Dropping Luke and Keyan on someone is all well and good but the damage output just isn't there so it won't get a lot accomplished before they die to AA fire or fighter screens. 


    1 hour ago, Ardaedhel said:

    While your reasoning is sound, that is, unfortunately, not the whole story.

    We got a clarification email from Senor Gernes a few days after the FAQ dropped, clarifying that you can choose to leave the squadrons unactivated and then activate them subsequently with a different ship as normal.  This is the ruling that was enforced at Worlds.

    If your TO doesn't buy those two sources as authoritative (which, I wouldn't blame them), then you'll need to get clarification from them on how they plan to rule RLB.

    I'm basically arguing that you couldn't use a GR-75 with Rapid Launch Bays to deploy two fighters and activate two different fighters. SO if I have Luke and Keyan loaded up in Bright Hope, I can't reveal a squadron dial, launch Luke and Keyan, and then activate Nym and Wedge. I'd have to either activate Luke and Keyan or deploy them and leave it at that, by my understanding. Very interesting to note that they used the non-mandatory activation ruling at Worlds, though. 

  15. 6 hours ago, BrobaFett said:

    RLB is deploy then fire *if you want to* if there are other squads in range you can activate them instead after placing squads, or you can just choose not to activate anything. 

    I'm not sure you can activate other squadrons. The text on the card says you can deploy "instead" of doing a normal squadron activation, and the FAQ is a bit unclear on whether or not you can leave them unactivated once deployed. Granted, the argument that you don't have to activate the squadrons you just launched is actually pretty solid since the FAQ since you can activate them, not you must. But I don't think you can launch Luke and Keyan with a GR-75 and then activate someone else with the same dial. Looking over the card it seems like it gives the option to replace your normal squadron activation with "deploy fighters, then attack if you want to or leave them ready for later," which isn't as good but still lets you get that Yavaris combo in. 

    Granted I play on the assumption that you do activate the fighters as you launch them but I can see why people don't think that's mandatory. The only issue I would have with it either way would be if my opponent wasn't clear on how he'd prefer to rule it, because that's potentially critical information. 

  16. Interdictors suck, he says. Then he explains how you can get 80 points (!) for free with one. At that poin *** basically cost you 14 points to put the Suppression refit in your list and it can fly around double-arcing. 

    I need to try Salvage Run. I've been trying to break my habit of just using Minefields/Solar Corona/Superior Positions in every list and this shows me that it won't be as difficult as I feared to make a list that can grab victory tokens and still do well at red and yellow objectives. I'm already secretly obsessed with Grav Shift Reroute, so I can just use this with Station Assault and Contested Outpost. Make a nice change from Minefields, maybe. 

  17. On 5/9/2017 at 11:35 AM, BrobaFett said:

    The idea is to load Luke and Keyan into the Quantum Storm RLB cruise missile, drop them off on the door step, and double tap them both with Yavaris for killer damage.

    It's a gimik that is hilarious when effective, but not as effective as you hope. I played this trick in the team tournament at worlds with Nym and Keyan. It was hilarious, it killed an assault frigate, but the flotilla was instantly evaporated and while it is super fun to use casually I don't think I would ever take it to a serious game.

    Doesn't RLB work on a "deploy then fire" basis, though? If it doesn't then that's a pretty solid combo. Or do you just use Yavaris next turn?

  18. 2 hours ago, FourDogsInaHorseSuit said:

    @Drasnighta even if it were procedural, where do you get your procedure from? 

    By "procedural" he means that first you choose a faction, then add a ship. From there, after each addition (ship, squadron, or upgrade) you do a legality check. So I decide I'm Imperials and add an ISD. ISD is Imperial and I have the points, so I'm fine. Next I add Relentless to it. Relentless is an Imperial title, equipped to the correct ship and I have the points. Jolly good, moving on. This process continues until you either stop adding things or do something you can't. For example, I add an MC80. That's a Rebel ship in my Imperial list, can't do that. I reverse the last addition and the list is once again legal. 

    By this logic the faction-changing title fundamentally can't work because the process would go "I add a Quasar to my Rebels list. Can't do that, have to go back." So you would never get to the part where you can actually equip the title and make it legal. I've argued that if the title does allow Rebels to use the Quasar, then it must be taken as proof that lists are not built in the way I described and you only have to check for legality after you consider it finished (but with time to correct it, just in case). 

    Apparently someone that works on Armada (Gernes) suggested that lists are built procedurally but currently that isn't an official thing. I haven't seen what Gernes said so I can't say if he meant it as a suggestion or if he felt it was relevant to how upgrades are designed, but I'll take Dras' word for it that something along those lines was said. I just see it as subject to change since it would be very awkward for them to make a faction-changing title if it worked that way. 

    Of course it should be emphasized that the title is only conjecture and there's literally no evidence that the Quasar can be taken in a Rebel fleet, so this could all be totally beside the point. 

  19. How do you plan to kill things? Two squadrons aren't going to get much done as far as damage goes unless nothing ever attacks them or engages them. 


    Three separate upgrades on three separate ships to support only two squadrons will not go well. You need more fighters. As it stands I could cripple your list pretty hard just by hitting the Rapid Launch Bays carrier at medium range with and ISD or VSD II. You probably haven't launched fighters at that distance, and 6-8 dice have a good chance of rolling the accuracy I need to stop your scatter token, and the damage will likely be lethal (especially if I landed any hits at long range). Just like that I've taken out 76 points, and rendered another 15 totally irrelevant. After that all you've got is a a few small ships with only one upgrade that still does anything. 

  20. I'm expecting to teach someone Armada on Saturday and want to have something more advanced than the basic core set game ready, to hopefully give a more accurate idea of what Armada feels like. Aside from the basics that are taught in any game scenario (attacking, moving, things you have to know in order to play) I'm hoping to include slightly more advanced concepts. He's played X-Wing so I'm thinking I want a non-standard crit, for example. Here are my tentative lists. He'll get his choice of which to play. 

    We'll play the core game if he thinks that will be better for him. I want to have these planned out in case he'd rather learn this way.

    These lists aren't supposed to be especially strong, just reasonably balanced. I'm willing to scrap one or both and start over if need be. 


    MC80 Star Cruiser

    -General Dodonna

    -Gunnery Team

    -NK-7 Ion Cannons (to teach non-standard crits and also strip the brace token from Relentless)


    Assault Frigate Mark II

    -Skilled First Officer

    -X17 Turbolasers


    GR-75 Medium Transports

    -Leia Organa 


    5 X-Wings

    Advanced Gunnery

    Contested Outpost

    Solar Corona



    Imperial II-class Star Destroyer

    -Admiral Motti

    -Gunnery Team

    -Reinforced Blast Doors 

    -X17 Turbolasers (is this a little too strong here?)



    Arquitens-class Light Cruiser

    -Turbolaser Reroute Circuits (to teach alternate uses for defence tokens)


    Gozanti-class Cruisers

    -Comms Net



    4 TIE Fighters


    Opening Salvo

    Contested Outpost



    The objectives were chosen mainly for simplicity, with that being more important than what was necessarily the best option. For example I chose Contested Outpost because "put this near your side and keep your big ship close to it" is easy to explain without getting too deep into detail. I'm aware that the TIEs are probably going to get torn to shreds, I'm fine with that. The X-Wings should help counter the threat of the ISD. The Rebels have Leia mainly to help offset the difficulty of Command 3, the Imperials deal with it by taking Relentless. I'm worried the ISD is too strong, because if the Liberty goes down too fast it's all over for the Rebels. X17s are the thing I'm most iffy on. I'm wondering if they should just be Dual Turbolaser Turrets instead. 

  21. 5 minutes ago, Drasnighta said:

    You're right, its just Expanded Launchers+ConFire for the 7.

    Oh, durr. I'm pretty bad for not concentrating fire. Too busy steering like a drunk senior or frantically duct-taping damage. That said with Demolisher+Expanded Launchers, just using Demolisher to do his thing nets you ten/eleven dice instead of the seven from using Piett. It's the triangles that get scary. 

  22. 12 minutes ago, Red Castle said:

    I took your idea and made it actually realistic from a balanced point of view and useful even if you're shooting from your side or rear firing arc. I mostly play imperial and the idea of being able to shoot with 19 dice with a ISD makes me sick.

    But even my idea might be too powerful with a Demolisher: it would still be possible to shoot with 2 Red, 7 Black after movement. And you don't want to make this ship more powerful. Maybe limit Piett ability to medium and large base only.

    I don't see how you're getting those red dice with so many black. At most I can imagine Expanded Launchers and one black die from each side for 6 black and two red out the front. More likely, you'd go for six out the side with ACM or APT. Either way it's horrifying, although Demolisher actually benefits less than most ships would because Shoot-move-shoot is easy mode for double arcing. In a lot of cases using Piett would actually cost you two dice. 

  • Create New...