Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Hockeyzombie

  1. 59 minutes ago, Kikaze said:

    #1. Equally skilled players. #2. Every game, think rationaly about your chances to win. If you cannot due to points difference, show everyone what an efficient coward you are, run around and hyperspace retreat whole fleet turn 4. #3. deal with snowballing the same way "league of legends" professional players do: play low risk low reward and keep refusing to take high risks unless disproportionaly advantaged. Like all snowbally games, you win either by being a ludicrously better player/strategist or by convincing the opponent to take unnecessary risks.

    1) There's basically just the two of us. There's a guy at our LGS that we often play on Saturdays but we don't have a reliable fourth player. We seem reasonably matched but I think I have an edge because I'm more willing to consult the forums and less likely to dismiss an effective plan because it's not very lore friendly. I'd consider a ramming list with CR90s but he would only do that with Hammerheads, for example. 

    2) He was making effective decisions, aside from both of us forgetting about hyperspace retreat. Part of the issue we had may have been that often "charge right at him and brawl" was the best strategy and my list seemed a bit better at it. My dice were also crazy good in the final round. Things were actually very even until an absolutely massive blowout turn.

    3) Admittedly this is one thing he should have done more. After I won the first game of round three I think he decided he had to really wound me in the other game so that we'd both have one fleet in good shape and one fleet limping along, which is a reasonable train of thought that backfired horribly. 

    1 hour ago, Kikaze said:

    Example. After losing the first games, play back, hyperspace retreat to conserve resources, and use initial bases to scale to 500. If he attacks a base, PUNISH! once yhe fleets become 500, victory points wont matter much since final battle will decide.

    The problem with that is it requires handing a lot of wins to me, and the All Out Assault can only be declared by a team within five (or four?) Campaign Points of winning. I wouldn't risk everything when I have a commanding lead. I also would have attacked a base on round four because I could easily throw a full 500 points at a 450 point fleets with multiple scarred ships. I may have lost but I would have permanently taken a few valuable unique upgrades out of play. A comeback was possible, but it would have been a tedious experience and wouldn't have led to enjoyable games for either of us. Your advice is sound but it requires a willingness to fight through a situation he didn't want to fight through, and one that I didn't want to make him fight through. 

  2. 2 hours ago, ovinomanc3r said:

    Maybe the disband fleet rule and build a new one.

    We'd have to revise it, but that is worth considering. The issue we both had when it was mentioned is that at this point I had a 500 point fleet with no obvious counter, so throwing fresh fleets at it would be unproductive if not suicidal. We could rule it as new fleets having a point limit based on the average cost of the enemy fleets, maybe? Someone also suggested ruling that unscarred uniques can still be used, so this might work. Still provides a reason to avoid losing or suffering heavy losses but doesn't take you out of the campaign if you get pummeled after the really early rounds. 

  3. 2 hours ago, MattShadowlord said:


    The Rebels cannot win a campaign in which they do not participate!

    I compliment you on your ingenuity, Admirals.

    Apparently they could, I won that campaign. At one point I was thinking of using Imperial units but having to use Rebel unique upgrades, as if a fleet had defected and the Rebellion had sent commanders and staff to lead them. I mainly didn't because I expected it would be game-breaking, and I wanted to have access to Demolisher, Avenger, and Relentless. 

  4. Last weekend my opponent conceded the campaign, and I couldn't really see a way to argue his points. Going into what became the final round (round three), both of his fleets had one win and one loss each while one of my fleets had two wins and the other was at two losses (but only an Arquitens and a TIE Fighter were scarred). I then tabled him in both games, losing a single Victory I and two Arquitens. Also some squadrons, but nothing I can't repair or field scarred. Basically I would have been in good shape going into the next round. My opponent was so battered that he couldn't even afford to clear the scars from all of his ships, and I was about to gain a major resource advantage thanks to bases. In short, I would almost certainly have smashed him in at least one of the battles in the next round, most likely knocking 100 or so points out of at least one of his fleets. I would have had plenty of points to repair any similar damage to my own fleets. 


    What I'm looking for is a way to mitigate the snowball effect. I understand that if he plays very well he could minimize damage or do a Show of Force (we both used Imperial units, but I was the "Rebels") to regain some resources. But he'd be fighting at a disadvantage even if I didn't take advantage of the situation to seize Corellia. I enjoyed the sense of progression but a lot of that is lost when we hit a point where it was clear who was going to win. SO I'm looking for a house rule that prevents the situation from getting too one-sided while still rewarding me for killing ships.


    My first thought is to leave everything as-is, except that scarred units don't permanently die if destroyed. So there's still a drawback to taking losses, but not one that can cripple a fleet entirely. While it is nicely dramatic that our campaign ended after one heroic victory by the "Rebels" it did create a situation that made continuing look like an unpleasant slog for my opponent, and I think this rule would prevent that without making kills feel pointless. But we've only done one campaign so I'm interested in thoughts and opinions. 

  5. 5 hours ago, NobodyInParticular said:

    Wait, you defended a base with Vics and he had surviving TIEs? Is this a typo or did you play a casual game with CC objectives? If the latter, doesn't that kind of muddle with the results given that the CC Base Defense Objectives are more biased towards second player than normal objectives?

    We both played as Imperials because he didn't own any Rebel stuff when we started (except for the core set stuff) and I didn't really want to play Rebels. So we just agreed that I was the "Rebels" for purposes of the campaign map but would field Imperial lists. 

  6. I defended a base last week, choosing the Armed Station objective. I already had one more activation, so with two it was very easy to stall until he got in close with my Victory Is. I lost one VSD, a Gozanti, and a few squadrons. He had like two TIE Fighters alive at the end. It was brutal. Getting RRBB for free against ships is really strong and activations are always good to have. Ion Cannon seems really powerful as well, I would have taken it if my list ran any Strategic squadrons. I was still willing to consider it but having to deploy my entire fleet first was a dealbreaker. 


    Anyway my point is that these objectives are (by design) unfair. There's a high risk of your fleet getting a broken back and having little to show for it. 

  7. I wouldn't be opposed to upgrades for squadrons, though I haven't got any particular ideas on what those upgrades would be or how they would work. I like the simplicity of squadrons, so basic things like missiles that give you an extra blue against ships or an upgrade that gives you a brace token would be fine by me. Obviously depending on upgrades there may need to be restrictions like "[squadron] only" or "you cannot equip this to squadrons with Rogue" but the basic idea seems fine. I can't say I like the firing arc idea, though. That would be a massive pain to sort out when you have a lot of "maybe it's in arc" situations, and as someone that tends to focus targets down one at a time I'd constantly be bumping squadrons and having to argue about whether or not they had a shot previously. 


    I'd like to see some really vicious anti-squadron upgrades that can only be equipped if you spend X or less points on squadrons. Like, something that replaces your anti-squad with triple red but only if you didn't take any fighters of your own? Maybe something that gives you a free anti-squadron attack out of any hull zone that didn't already make an anti-squad attack? No idea what those would cost but I like the idea of being able to build a few-if-any squadron list and not get utterly shredded by enemy fighters. I mean, I like the squadron game but if properly balanced upgrades like that could add tons of new options for list building. Imagine three ISD Is not being afraid of enemy bombers even though they only have like four Interceptors to protect them. 

  8. The X-Wing crowd didn't seem to have much trouble with it when they released Palpatine, so it shouldn't be too much trouble. Granted, Palpatine took two of the same slot instead of two different ones but that shouldn't pose too many issues. 

  9. 1 hour ago, Green Knight said:

    They are awesome.

    But they are 7 pts.

    So APT.

    Sad really.

    For 2 points I think it's worth the upgrade, provided I don't need to cut something else. Both options are very good but the ability to tear through shields so much faster is worth two points. I've been using APTs a bit more lately to remind myself that the damage deck in Armada doesn't **** around, but I've seen how scared people are of getting near a ship with ACMs when they have low shields and they're right to be afraid. Absolutely shredded a Home One not long ago because he had been using Redirect to a lot and had barely any shields when Demolisher got in close. 

  10. 12 hours ago, Ardaedhel said:

    It is very rare for RR to be worth the cost over APT or ACM. Even if you could guarantee shots out of both side arcs, you're paying more to average the same added damage as APT, it's susceptible to defense tokens, and it does not go directly on the hull.

    Most of the time, though, you only get to bring one side or the other to bear, particularly if you're focus-firing, which means your efficiency plummets.

    If you frequently encounter defensive rerolls, RR pulls roughly even with the crit effects in value. Otherwise, it's unfortunately just worse.

    Good points. I suppose to get proper value out of Rapid Reload you'd have to fly directly between two enemy ships, and most of the ships that might consider it aren't durable enough to survive that little adventure. Assault Concussion Missiles seem like the best overall damage option, since they rapidly wear down shields and effectively disable Redirect tokens. They also make it ineffective to reposition because they've been chewing through the shields of whichever hull zone is now the target. 

    This all goes out the window if you're using X17s, though. Since Redirect already doesn't work against you, you may as well add some free faceup damage cards from Assault Proton Torpedoes. This would open them up to move shields with Engineering commands but if they're doing that they aren't removing damage cards or recovering shields, so it's still profit. 

  11. 2 hours ago, IronNerd said:

    I know I'm running the risk of taking us off topic, but it seems an appropriate place to have the discussion. This opens up the entire ordnance discussion, doesn't it? When do you run ER vs APT for example? ER is fantastic, enough so that I don't expect to use EL any time soon. APTs have been my favorite for a while, it's going to take a lot of testing and even more theory crafting for me to work out when to take each one.

    For me it's almost always the crit missiles, based mainly on how many points I have. I love Assault Concussion Missiles because they rapidly make Redirect tokens useless, but I'm starting to see the power in periodically slapping a faceup card on the target. I especially like that against bigger ships, since it takes longer for them to bring up enough Engineering commands to fix the damage and by then the shields are down. Expanded Launchers have done work on my Victory Is but at that point they're more effective as a big cone of "don't be here" than as an actual weapon. Nobody in their right mind gets near five black dice if they can help it. They usually think they can handle the critical effects, only to realize they can't. Also I freaking love Screed so crit effects are a big deal to me. 


    Anyway Expanded Racks are great if you don't expect to get many close range attacks. Three points for two more black dice is a great bargain, provided you aren't attacking enough to justify Rapid Reload. This will probably be a very, very popular filler upgrade. It seems more valuable than three points towards initiative. 

  12. Don't underestimate the danger posed by squadrons. Back when we only had one core set, I almost lost to a CR90 with my Victory II because he had three or four X-Wings constantly bombing me. Learning when to use squadron commands to close in and start the fighter engagement on your terms is very helpful, and for a new player I suggest using Major Rhymer if you want to use TIE Bombers. That range increase is amazing.

  13. 1 hour ago, FourDogsInaHorseSuit said:

    It's a house rule. Use common sense about the intent.

    Thank you. It amazes me how many times I've seen interesting ideas get shot down because the developers couldn't do it within the rules they set for themselves. It really isn't hard to just agree that a Crew!Admiral only works for the ship they're actually on, and Konstantine is the only one I can think of that presents any real trouble. Well him and Dodonna but it isn't hard to just agree that Dodonna only applies when the damage was caused by the ship he's on. This isn't an official thing guys, interpreting the rules according to intent will be more productive than rules-lawyering. Especially since to use a house rule you have to discuss things like Dodanna technically being the same when you suggest using the rule in the first place. 

    Looking over the commander options, almost all of them work perfectly if you replace "each friendly ship" with "this ship," except for Konstantine and Dodonna. For Konstantine, maybe apply his ability to one enemy ship per turn and/or say that Konstantine must be on one of the friendly ships that triggers the ability? He's a bit awkward to work with in this regard but I think it could be sorted out easily enough with players willing to use this rule. I might have to suggest it when the next campaign starts. 

  14. My opponent and I agreed that for squadrons, you just look at what you're about to place on the table. If fighters are more than a third of your fleet, someone's got to chill in the hangar (unless a ship getting perma-killed is the cause, of course). We've also instituted a disband rule specifically so we won't have to sit there trying to get units killed just to replace them. In retrospect, I don't know why I pushed that so hard since all I wanted was the option to trade some TIE Fighters out for Defenders once I get my ships and squadrons filled out. Wouldn't exactly be hard to lose those TIEs the old fashioned way. Oh well, still a good rule. 


    Regarding the AOA, we just agreed to do one after the campaign has a winner if we didn't do one already. I think the agreement was to just treat ships as having whatever scars and veterancy they had before the last round of fighting, since we expect to have our full 500 by that time and the scars will make things more interesting. This largely prevents the need for house rules about the AOA, but I do like the idea that it doesn't necessarily end the campaign but does provide a huge boost to the winner. 


    We also decided to add two new 400 point fleets on turn five, built using the rules used at the start of the campaign. I'm not sure why it was suggested but since there was a mutual agreement that the new fleets would fight each other I was up for it. We've yet to actually reach that point; turn two just ended and we've yet to declare attacks for turn three. I like the fact that even after I've hit full capacity with my other fleets, I'll have some incentive to increase my resource income so I can bring the third fleet up to strength more quickly. 

  15. 7 hours ago, Kikaze said:

    that you can build a fleet without an interdictor, and it will be easier to use and equally effective. do you argue that the interdictor is easy to use OR that you cannot build an equally effective fleet without it? I am crazy so i like the thing, but for most people why use , risking a misplay due to exertion etc, something harder-to-use if it is not bluntly more effective? 

    The Interdictor provides ways to manipulate the speed of enemy ships and even move around obstacles, both of which are largely exclusive to it. Correctly using either of those effects can be better than taking another heavy hitter, especially if your opponent can't afford to keep using Navigate commands or ends up stuck in front of an ISD that they would normally have escaped from. I used an Interdictor to pin an enemy ship in front of two VSDs last night and hammered him with twelve dice instead of the six I would have gotten if he could move. 


    Since it was a Corellian Conflict game, I also got to hold his last ship on the table and kill it since it couldn't hyperspace away, but that doesn't apply in regular games so YMMV on how useful that is. To me, it meant another 43 points he needs to spend repairing damage. 

  16. I usually just use Comms Net to throw tokens at my more important ships, or Repair Crews to help keep them alive. Beyond that I basically see them as 23 points to make my opponent move two ships so I can attack with my ISD at close or medium range. That feels like the biggest advantage, although I do think I should get in the habit of actually being in range to use Squadron commands more often. These days I find it very difficult to build a list that doesn't feature a Gozanti, even if it's just chilling uselessly in the back. 

  17. I don't know if I'd want more factions. Neutral ships that can belong to either side would be interesting, but trying to add two entire factions is maybe too much. I'd love to see some of the "leftovers" make their way into Armada, though. Apparently the Rebels at some point had a ship like the one that Grievous used as his flagship, and they briefly had a droid control ship. That might be too big for Armada, but still. 

  18. 1 minute ago, Vineheart01 said:

    Uh, theres nothing red for PTL and it says nothing about 2 stress from a previous faq.

    I think he's confusing the two stress from using PTL and EI with a PTL nerf. Or something? I honestly have no idea what he's talking about. Unless this is some weird attempt at a joke.

  19. Lost by exactly one point last night. Not humiliating exactly, but my decision not to move my Gozanti to safety is annoying. It was a Corellian Conflict game and I was hoping to build a base there. It was the last round of the game and I chose to make some long range attacks at the back of an ISDII despite needing at least two double hit results to have even a chance at killing it. I could have moved my flotilla to be out of the front arc and won, and it turns out the ISD would still have been in range after moving. 


    On the other hand I completely tabled the opposing list last week so I guess it's all good. 

  20. I've got him in a Corellian Conflict list, riding an Interdictor and accompanied by two Victory Is and a Gozanti. Mostly I just try to put something valuable in front of one or both Victorys and then slow it down so I can keep pummeling it. Worked really well against someone that tried to go head to head against the Victorys with an ISD and his own Interdictor, although some of that was due to my activation advantage (thanks, naked Gozantis) and my Interdictor crushing his Gladiator with some squadron help. 


    I did like Konstantine, though. He was able to get me two rounds of double arc shots on the Gladiator when I would have only had one. If you can keep your fleet in a relatively close formation you can always hit something with him and against a ship that doesn't spam navigates that can be a massive problem. 

  21. I've gotten some good damage out of the Suppression refit with double arcs. The damage itself is a bit low, but there's a lot of accuracy results so what you roll is often what you get. That said, you'll probably want to pick a ship that deals lots of damage to help even out the Interdictor. If you slow the enemy ships down, you can probably get an extra round of close range attacks from a Victory I or something. 

  22. Ships are generally garbage at killing squadrons, and three black dice are vicious. Three blue seems decent against ships, but so far I've only used Morna to kill squadrons. A Brace token that just refuses to go away is also handy. She's expensive, sure, but when you put Rogue, Counter 1, a reroll ability, and a respawning Brace token on something with three black dice you get a lot of power as far as squadrons go. I've actually yet to use generic Decimators but I have high expectations for them in an upcoming Corellian Conflict game. 

  23. On 2/23/2017 at 3:55 AM, Gadgetron said:

    What SHOULD be done and what IS done are two entirely different things, the base points between the ships and the core abilities provided by the game are what matter.  The ISD costs more than 3 cr90bs, those cr90bs provide more of just about everything (Hull, Firepower, Activations) than the ISD, this grants an inherent bonus and edge to smaller ships.  I haven't even brought up how much more useful 3 ships are when objectives come into play.  Unless they start allowing ships to hold multiple of the same token, or the tokens to tie into a stat, the core rules provide an (additional) in-built advantage to smaller ships over large via the rules regarding tokens.  Even then, fixing tokens would just be one step in solving the larger problem.

    Yes once you get into a game the ISD will have ships to support it, but so will the opponent, its not just one player who gets a 400 point list, both get equal points (CC games outstanding.)  Just because the ISD gets a Gozanti and a few upgrades doesn't even the playing field, because now the cr90s get upgrades and a flotilla of their own.  Sure they don't all benefit from the same upgrade on one ship, but this just means the points are spread out whereas the ISD is a juicier target.  The ISD may kill a corvette or two, but as long as that last corvette kills the ISD it doesn't matter.

    Short version: In all respects but upgrade costs, small ships have an edge over large.


    Except that again, the CR90s are likely to be completely wiped out in three or four attacks. They cannot repel firepower of that magnitude. The ISD can throw some Engineering commands down and laugh his way to victory. CR90s are better more objectives that require mobility, but a full 400 points should include other ships to do that. The ISD is not there to collect objective tokens. It's there to kill things. It may have less health and firepower than the CR90s combined, but it's more efficient at dealing and enduring damage. 


    And AGAIN, this game is not played in a vacuum. I'm well aware that the Rebels will also be adding more ships when things escalate to 400 points. But if we're looking at a vacuum then flotillas are the most worthless things in the game. I'm also pointing out that this provides the Empire more ways to offset the activation advantage, and more ways to quickly kill those fragile little corvettes. Realistically the ISD list will have fewer activations at first. But it will also have little trouble swatting a couple flies, especially if there's an Arquitens or a Gladiator that can swing by and deal some damage to the CR90s (the Gladiator can probably kill them outright with Screed and the right upgrades). Gunnery Teams could make it possible to kill two corvettes in one activation, though it's more likely they would be massively damaged and something else would finish them. I'm not saying big ships are unstoppable, just that I don't trust small ships to win a fight against big ones without some help. 


    Well, I trust Gladiators but that's just blatant favouritism there. Favouritism and Assault Concussion Missiles. 

  • Create New...