Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Jochmann

  1. Depends strongly on my list and the individual ships. Mostly, a VSD is the core of my fleet and on most occasions it will start with a Nav, then a squad and than a repair command. My Glad starts with a nav and wulff ensures it won't get used up and than mostly a repair. If I use the Dominator VSDII, I never concentrate fire but instead use repairs (as they do essentially the same, but provide two dice instead of one).
  2. Another big deal as well: A temporarily reduced speed (even if it is reduced to zero) will not rob a ship of tokens, as its dial is not reduced to zero. Of course they will find it pretty hard to evade, though.
  3. Going back to the OP: I did exactly that: I painted my two-command-dial-dials blue and red - just out of convenienance to see with a glance, if I already used this ship. The other are black, grey and white, and I will add numbers to them (as well as a freehands of the regarding ships type, just because I can and 'cause I like it pretty). My second movement tool is just length two, as an Imperial, I thought this might be handy, my second shooting range ruler is cut at medium (just a few millimeters longer than distance three) - all this not to prevent cheating by my opponents (still a stupid word, but playmates sounds wrong...), but because I'm lazy and it makes gaming faster and easier. Cheating would nevertheless be stupidly easy if I'd like to. Changing the dials while picking them up to look at my stack is a no-brainer, training rolling the dice to get better results is easy as well (though I am using a dice cup, because lazy, you know) - you can't stop a cheater from cheating, except stop playing with him. Every game with random results is prone to cheating, prone to very easy cheating, so I don't think it is the developers main problem to stop cheating but to make a game fun. Cheaters will be sorted out by the players, who are fed up with them.
  4. I just did exactly this. Boiling water is working, 70°C is not... it really got hot in that car.
  5. According to the "Guardian" and the "Daily Telegraph", Cristopher Lee died today at the age of 93. RIP dear Cristopher, you will always have a place in my heart.
  6. Not that I remembered. Do you have a link?
  7. Well, my prequell hate stems from several things: - CGI-effects as a substitute for plot and charme - idiotic political geniuses - Jar-Head Binks, a character who fits in like a teletubby into a western - General "I'm a Vader for kids *cough* "- Grievous; they could have kept Dooku (a really good character) longer alive rather than introducing this lightsaber-copter - autonomous battlerobots with a teletubbyesk speach pattern and behaviour who are rendered useless (or rather even more useless as they already are) when their control vessel is destroyed - midichlorians (I think of them as forceparasites. They infest force users, the stronger the user is, the more parasites there are) - Senator Jar-Head Binks... - Padme child molesting young Anakin - The clean look of the movies - Leia is remembering her mother in RotJ and describing her to Luke... - The Death Star in Ep 2 (?). It needed 20 years to get build, the DSII ca. 4 years - Gungans...well slap-stick in general.
  8. It does. It is just more like the ant nowadays rather than the elephant it used to be. But it is still a monarchy.
  9. I completely disagree. There is nothing nice about the Mary-Sue Consortium, but I'd love to see more than two fractions...perhaps something like S&V or traitor imps with their own commanders and uniques and without the possibility to take loyal imp uniques. Clone Wars stuff might be okay, but I see problems as a) the Clone Wars stuff should be outdated but b) is way better than the imperial or rebel stuff, according to the makers of clone wars. As such, it is more Mary-Sue(again...well, probably cloned) Wars than Clone Wars and won't balance well within Armada.
  10. The only problem you may face is space for the cards and other management-stuff, as the play area itself is no good place to store them.
  11. The ELs are winning through Screed at least as much as the ACMs. You have more dice meaning more chances for blanks to spend and turn. The EL with Screed will on average inflict more damage than the ACM, if considering a Gladiator frontal arc. And they will be able to deal a faceup damage card (nice boon), but they are still inferior to ACMs, when considering other arcs and the likeliness of getting a good shot when your opponents is on guard. But, unlike ACM, you can herd the opponents ships way better, as you don't get a big no-go zone but rather a well defined no-go arc.
  12. You could say: "While resolving one attack" or "While resolving all attacks".
  13. No, the "while" effect inhibits the occurance of triggering the effect again during the attacking. So if attacking is the whole process, you can only use Warlord or H9 once per "attacking". The question is, what does attacking cover? Covers it all attacks during the attack phase, covers it only one attack or covers it just one dice roll (improbable)? Absolutely correct, they have different triggers, but you can only use it once per event I dont get to reroll crits twice, but I do get to reroll crits for each roll of the dice because I can trigger it during each roll. You can only use them once per event. But Warlord and H9 are limitted in their usage to one die, while the PDR allows to reroll every crit. I send a mail to the support, I will post the reply.
  14. No. PDF allows rerolling (all) crits while attacking, Warlord and H9 allows changing one die.
  15. Of course is gathering a dice pool an event, as every other step of an attack as well, but these are not the events referred to. Attacking is the event referred to, but, sadly, this is not clear either.
  16. Yes, I know. And the best is: It doesn't matter at all. It is just personal feeling^^
  17. Still it is the same activation step called "Attack". It is a valid arguement to refer to this step as "attacking". I don't think FFG intended to interpret it this way, but I am hoping on an errata regarding this issue. Until one arrives, I will handle "while attacking" as "while performing a single attack".
  18. Going to chime in: I prefer them as 3 crafts. What other players think doesn't matter to the game, so this is ruleswise a moot point, but I'd like to explain why I prefer them as three crafts nevertheless. I base my opinion on the strenght of starfighters as presented in the X-Wing, TIE-Fighter and X-Wing Alliance games, as I have never played X-Wing miniatures. The novels I won't take into account, as it greatly depends on the author, what the crafts are capable of. Pro: 1. 12 X-Wings would perform better on a battlefield, they will destroy a CR90 and a Neb-B without any difficulty, if they aren't hindered by TIEs. In Armada, one squadron of X-Wings can't destroy a Neb-B nor a CR90 without help. 2. TIE Fighter greatly used flights of three crafts (not exclusively, though). 3. A YT-1300 won't perform better than a whole squadron of X-Wings, not even the Falcon Contra: 1. No one ever said that the S&Vs won't represent squadrons...
  19. Ninja'ed... While effect: a "while" effect can be resolved during the specified event and cannot occur for that instance of the effect. This leaves us with a problem: a ship can perform two attacks during its attack step. Is this attack step the "While attacking", because it will finish all its attacks during this step, is a single attack of those two "while attacking", because it is a different attack or is every single roll against a squadron "While attacking" because a different defender gets attacked? I prefer version b), a single attack is "while attacking", mainly because the "otherwise it would be an exhaustion effect" arguement seems right, but this is no proof. c) seems utterly wrong, as another defender means still the same attack, but a) seems as legit as b) ruleswise.
  20. Warlord and H9 both allow to use their effect on one die while attacking, not one die per dice roll. They do not even grant these effects per attack, but per activation.
  21. The crit effect and the crit damage are different things. Think of the crit icon as: 1 damage plus a crit effect. Or better yet, the other way round, one crit effect plus a damage.
  22. Correct. The number of crit symbols doesn't matter, as long as you have at least one. And this crit is not necessarily always an upside damage card, it may be, like with the ACM upgrade, more damage or something totally different. Theoretically they can each inflict two crits, as they could each be firing with two facings at the VSD. It is one crit per attack, not per ship. Squadrons can be able to inflict crits as well, they need the keyword bomber to do so, though.
  23. I found one serious drawback, though: Warlord and H9 allows to modify one die per attack - attacks vs. squadrons count as one attack, no matter how many squadrons you really attack. So this pretty pricey combo works against exactly one squadron, while the Point Defense Reroute allows rerolling crits while attacking squadrons.
  24. The outcome is right, but the reasoning why is wrong. You have a crit symbol left in the dicepool, after the dicepool modify-step is over. Thus you can resolve a crit effect. Then the damage is summed up: three hits plus two crits means 5 damage. Now brace is resolved, 2,5 damage, rounded to 3. Per attack. Edit: Two crits, not three
  • Create New...