Jump to content

Parkdaddy

Members
  • Content Count

    789
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Parkdaddy

  1. Class of 16 here. Yeah, you probably won’t find anything anywhere near you. The nearest place I found with a consistent community was Gamers Gambit in Connecticut as a firstie (forget the name of the city). I forget if it was 1 or 1.5 hours. But there was a Chick-fil-A at the mall nearby, so it was totally worth the drive.
  2. Check out Obsidian Squadron on Facebook. It’s used for all Ffg games in Missouri
  3. You will probably have to travel to get a game in. Metagames in Springfield is where I went while I was there, and that’s really the only place I found with consistent players anywhere nearby. Eclipse games and comics in Rolla has tables, but you’ll have to find someone for Armada. There’s also a small store right outside the main gate (right side of the road as you’re leaving) that I never visited because I never noticed it until the day I was leaving.
  4. Had a specific question that I thought may have been answered before, but couldn’t find it, so I hypothesized a general question that becomes more relevant the more that new interactions and special upgrades are released, which also answers the question I want to ask. I will 1) pose the current state of effect resolution as I see it, 2) give an generic better illustrate the question, and then 3) pose my question. Timing, effects, and resolution queue. When a timing hits (ie, end of round, during an attack, etc...), upgrades with that timing get put in the queue for resolution and are resolved according to initiative, as each player sees fit. 1) In Armada, this is currently simple because the board state does not often change as a result of resolving effects in the queue, WHILE those effects are being resolved. All modifications to an attack are resolved before the attack resolves, and therefore no squadrons or ships are removed from the board during the resolution of effects with a “while attacking” timing ...currently 2) to better illustrate, I’ll use a generic sequence of events followed by specific example from Star Wars Destiny. *Timing Alpha occurs *Queue generates: Effect 1, Effect 2... -Effect 1 resolves -Effect 2 resolves *as a result of Effect 1, Effect X was put into play, which has Timing Alpha. However, because it was not in play to “see” Timing Alpha, it does not get to resolve, even if other effects with the same timing are currently resolving. This is how FFG has ruled with other games, and it has come up in Armada via Raddus/Bail, and Pryce/Hyperspace Assault, etc... other upgrades where a set-aside ship forgoes the opportunity to use an effect. A “seeing” rule is consistent and easily applied within this context 3) The “seeing” rule becomes tricky, however, when effects get put in a queue and then the board state changes as a result of those effects, before the timing is over, and in a manner that significantly alteres the way other effects still in the queue would resolve. Specific example to follow, and then I’ll shut up. Fighter Coordination teams allows you to move squadrons after you move, provided they are in range. Flight Commander allows you to perform a squad command after you move. Say you end your movement out of range to move any squads, but still in range to command squads. They both have the same timing, so they both get put in the queue, and you choose to command squadrons first. You move the squadrons into range of FCTs, then use FCTs to move them an additional 1. FCTs “saw” the timing and therefore got put in the queue, but it did not “see” the squadrons until during the resolution as a result of the board state changing, while it was in the queue. Is this legal?
  5. Agreed. Additionally, as written, you currently could choose to toggle the activation slider of an enemy squadron, thus introducing Dutch’s ability to the Imps. Not a bad thing, IMO, but very undercosted for the flexibility and power
  6. I would consider a millennial anyone who wasn’t alive when the OT came out/younger than 30. From reading the forum rants against including prequel stuff over the past 2 years and some, admittedly, ubiquitously derived assumptions, it would appear that most opposition comes from those who grew up with the OT. But yes, I do believe you were correct in some of my misconceptions, though I have definitely met multiple baby-boomers who absolutely love the models and only buy the expansions for the hobbyist aspect. The game appeals to a younger crowd, but the nostalgia appeals to the more affluent crowd.
  7. Agreed on predictions 1 and 3, but I believe the prequel factions are inevitable for Armada, for almost all the same reasons that you called out for the Executor. I say we get Clone Wars factions before X Wing. -It will sell. The ships are beautiful, iconic, with lots of screentime, and a lot of people want them. Not as iconic or desired as the Executor, perhaps, but the demand will be there nonetheless. -Someone pointed it out earlier; rebooting of the Clone Wars. You want fuel for campaigns, unique squadrons, future life for the game? Plenty of cannon material within that series which will appeal to Millenials who grew up with the prequels. We don’t necessarily dominate the miniatures scene at this point in time (because some of our pocketbooks aren’t exactly that big), but a few years down the road and Millenials/Generation X will be the target audience. -Lastly, from a thematic standpoint, the Clone Wars era lends itself more towards the “Armada-style” battles that SWA is supposed to encapsulate. There were far more full fleet conflicts during this era than during the GCW, and there is plenty of material to draw from. This game was designed for the CWE, and FFG would be crazy not to play into that.
  8. Yavaaris plus Aces is really strong, but there are alternatives to doing well and still having fun. Ys plus HWKs with ruthless strategists (AF Mkii) presents a ton of hull to chew through. The trick is to hit your opponent with the Ys before the Intel is gone. Massed Bs also presents a lot of hull, plus AA competence, plus heavy AS capability. Combined with Flight Commander, fighter coordination teams, and AFFM!, they almost an effective speed 5.
  9. No, it is not. However, with the nerfing of Demolisher, Engine Techs is no longer an auto-include, opening up the slot for FCTs as an equally viable option. In traditional style lists, Demo rarely flies with squad support, even if squads are in the list. At most it would be the equivalence of 2 TIEs in a screen, assuming they’re able to cover Demo before Demo gets into position. Previously this was an issue, as Demo was always dialing Nav or CF, but @TheCallum‘s suggestion of Thrawn is a nice, new way to cover down on this weakness. Demo gets to Nav into position, AND provide him/herself with squadron cover without first opening itself up to a concentrated bomber strike. That has always been a pitfall of Demo play that I, as a Rebel player, have always been able to take advantage of. The concept I’m trying to get at, though, is outfitting Demo for a multi-role. You can’t always get the last-first, you can’t always get first. But you can always synchronize Demo with squadron support to either screen or play the objective for points while still having the option to use Demo in a slightly less-threatening, traditional ship hunting role. I just haven’t seen a Demo used like this.
  10. I don’t see how adding a Bomber with a special ability that guarantees accuracies against ships takes away from your anti-ship capabilities... But i do believe you brought up a great point: the rock-paper-scissors of Armada, which Demo can fill either the squadless or squad heavy rolls very effectively. I think that using Demo in a carrier capacity would give it a nice, rounded approach. Another point you brought up was taking away from activations by including squads in the list. The traditional Demo relies heavily on the last-first play, but the unreliability of last-first play in the new wave has been brought up in multiple other threads. Demo can’t be fielded to rely on last-first anymore, and so I think that further reinforces the concept of fielding a Demo that can flex squads and assist in objective play. The build I’m leaning towards in list building is GSD-II, FC/FCT, OE, and APTs. Throw in 2 Lambdas and Captain Jonus with other squad cover. Demo maintains the majority of its bite against ships, can kill Flotillas in a single shot with Jonus, and flexes the Lambdas to kill objective play.
  11. Fleet conditions. View these as working somewhat like an admirals ability, that can either help or hinder your fleet (and either cost or refund points spent). I think introducing that mechanic (with tons of playtesting) alongside either a new campaign or factions would give FFG some breathing space to hold off on producing more Rebllion/Empire Ships. They could entirely shakeup the meta with something like that.
  12. Flight Commander/FCT is where I was going. The great thing about those timings is that it’s the same timing as Demo—shoot then resolve a squad command, or vice versa. And that shot can be against squads or a ship, pending which element needs focusing down. The Mauler double splash via FCT is a wonderful idea, and I think it is made more possible by a Demo set up. Against a decent squad player, it would be virtually impossible to fire it off, and it just isn’t going to happen against a stellar player. But a Demo with FC/FCT and ruthless strategists (RS) could feasibly have Mauler jump into a fray, eliminate the squads he is engaged with, and move him again via FCT. The thing I’d like about this build is that it maintains versatility by only dedicating the Weapons Team slot to anti-squadron duty. FC/FCT remains useful for anti-ship duty as well (lining up a Jonus shot with a GSD-II, objective play).
  13. I do quite like that build, used it in a CC campaign specifically to counter @Brikhause‘s Rieekan aces. It was swingy, but fun. Screed/Flechettes definitely helps with being able to lock down any single “danger-ace,” like Ten Numb or Dutch. The use of ordnance experts also helps with putting the anti-ship power back into the Demo-build, but then you’re giving up the ordnance and officer slots to upgrades that will only affect Aces. Aces were prevalent enough at worlds to warrant it (and based on the top tables, I’d say @Kristjan made a great meta call), and they probably still will be.
  14. Definitely FCTs. For a long time, I was wanting to use FCTs on an Interdictor or Squall in order to use Lambdas for objective play, but the Glad has that extra punch, as you pointed out. I think that would be key: a mini-carrier with punch I think that Demo using FCTs with Lambdas and Minefields or Firelanes could really pull some weight and mitigate the weaknesses of not going 1st with Demo. That’s where I would go with the use of FCTs on any ship, though
  15. BLUF: to discuss building a Demo made for squadron (not anti-squadron) play. I know Demo is already used excessively, but I wanted to generate more discussion on how to use it in a different, unique way not usually seen. The OG Demo focuses on one thing: killing ships. Very effective, and the cause of a lot of “Demo is OP” rants back in the early waves. Not as effective nowadays, but still very powerful. The anti-squad Demo focuses on one thing: killing squadrons. Very effective by using ruthless strategists and tight turns to hit squads with 2 automatic damage on top of whatever gets rolled, but trades off the majority of its bite against ships by doing so (sans Screed or Vader commanders). My proposal-Carrier Demo: I’m sure it’s been tried before, but I haven’t seen any discussion here about it. I already have thoughts and a build in mind for using Demo in this capacity, but I wanted to see community thoughts on how best to use it for squadron play first. Links to old posts that I may have missed (with snarky asides), upgrade suites, full lists, and general discussion are welcomed.
  16. Replacing one of the Vics with 2 Flotillas and more squadrons would allow you to take repair teams and put more upgrades on your ships. More deployments, more activations, more flexibility. The extra Victory is great for that extra long range firepower, but I think you will find it hard to bring those guns to bare on the same targets in succession, especially without getting in your own way. Ive been toying around with similar list ideas using Konstantine and a couple lambdas, focusing on tanking and objective play. Use speed tricks play to force bad objective play (landing on a mine, fire lane token, obstacle...)
  17. That is exactly along the lines of what I was thinking. They can only take a token if you guess right, and if you guess wrong, they get to use the command as if they had spent a token. I would also change the timing to be at the beginning of the ship phase (this way Command 1 ships are still affected), and I would limit it to 3 rounds, probably 2-4.
  18. Had you considered reversing the effect? Make it so that Thrawn guesses his opponent’s commands (with several changes to keep it from being OP and locking out squadron play). This will force your opponent to take an unconventional approach and makes Thrawn more offensive in nature. I also feel like that would be more in keeping with his bio.
  19. Been a while since I’ve been on the forums, been longer since I posted, and even longer since I’ve played. Been reading up on meta discussions, and picked up on a bit of doom and gloom over Rieekan and squadrons. And lack of product announcements. So it would appear onothing much changed. Amidst all of that, I saw a list that I really liked. An Imperial 3 activation list using ISD with ordnance pods, ruthless strategists, a ton of bombers, and mauler mithel. And apparently, Garm is all the rage. Which brings me to... But Y tho? Faction: Rebel Alliance Points: 400/400 Commander: Garm Bel Iblis Assault Objective: Precision Strike Defense Objective: Planetary Ion Cannon Navigation Objective: Intel Sweep [ flagship ] MC75 Armored Cruiser (104 points) - Garm Bel Iblis ( 25 points) - Aspiration ( 3 points) - Damage Control Officer ( 5 points) - Ruthless Strategists ( 4 points) - Expanded Hangar Bay ( 5 points) - Electronic Countermeasures ( 7 points) - X17 Turbolasers ( 6 points) - Leading Shots ( 4 points) - Ordnance Pods ( 3 points) = 166 total ship cost GR-75 Medium Transports (18 points) - Bright Hope ( 2 points) - Toryn Farr ( 7 points) = 27 total ship cost Nebulon-B Support Refit (51 points) - Redemption ( 8 points) - Ahsoka Tano ( 2 points) - Projection Experts ( 6 points) = 67 total ship cost GR-75 Medium Transports (18 points) - Bomber Command Center ( 8 points) = 26 total ship cost 2 VCX-100 Freighters ( 30 points) 6 Y-Wing Squadrons ( 60 points) 2 HWK-290s ( 24 points) = 114 total squadron cost No Aces, not high activation, Redemption? what we have here is, as I see it, the rebel equivalent of the above mentioned list with a few items fitting my own personal agenda, namely, Redemption. And as a Rieekan Aces player, of course, I have a variant with a couple Y-wing Aces, as well as slight variations on the MC75. The hardest choice was the officer slot. DCO makes for A) good use of the double contains, with all the new crits running around, and B) insurance against APT fleets for Precision Strike. Alternates involve Flight Commander and trade the HWKs for more Ys, the thought being to take care of any engaged squads with a double shot of RS (regular attack and Pods), hitting anything left with VCXs, then commencing the attack on the enemy ships. Weaknesses I perceive: barely enough squadron activations. I’m expecting to lose at least a couple, especially with RS. Everything is pretty “ride or die” on the MC75. The ability to win big is fairly limited, while the risk of a big loss hinges on the one ship. Changing up the objectives to make it a point farm could help with that. Issues handling other “hull-sink” squadron lists. The list is highly efficient with plink damage (not as efficient as the imperial version), but another list spamming strategic squadrons or heavy bombers will significantly increase the strain on my own bombers. Ideally, 134 points of squadrons could be reduced within 1.5-2 turns, even with Gallant Haven, while losing 2-3 of my own squadrons. A mirror match will probably take 3 turns, and the bombers will be hanging by a thread. And then all I have to work with is the gangly Mc75, probably out of position, but I win the squadron game by a large margin.
  20. If you’re planning the event from this far out and trying to pull in people from outside the locale, definitely look at how close (timewise) other major events are to it. I’m sure someone on here already has the entire year of known events planned out for themselves and would be willing to share if asked. Back to the credibility point, if I’m choosing between going to Gencon one weekend and going to this event the next weekend (because even though I’d love to do both, I’d have to pay a lot for travel in both cases), it would be pretty hard to pass up Gencon.
  21. To echo an above post, I’d love to do a narrative style event for Armada that also manages to keep a competitive edge. When I was starting to TO, I was brainstorming ideas and borrowing from the local 40K TO to make a very different, unofficial tournament format that would keep even competitive players on their toes and give new players chances to be recognized aside from the usual 1st, 2nd, 3rd. If you’d like, I can pm you some of those ideas. Now to answer your questions, notwithstanding anything narrative based, 1. As a competitive player, I love a challenge. If I’m going to an official, high-level event, I expect competitive play. If I’m going to a non-official event, then fleet building restrictions, special rules, etc, are the benchmarks, but also competitive play if I know there are good players present. 2. Satisfaction is my greatest prize. The San Antonio based ACFC rocks out in that department through community building and making players feel a part of something. That said, team shirts. If this is going to be a premier event (with lots of forward planning and participants), then i wouldn’t mind shirts as a part of the registration fee. 3. Try me 4. Hmmm, this is complicated. If it was an event with lots of credibility behind it (ie, big names are confirmed as going, people I know are going, lots of player slots available (40+), lots of circulation on Facebook groups, it’s at least the second time), then I’d easily pay upwards of $50 for a multi day event with a guaranteed 6+ games (thinking 2 a day over 3 days, or 3 a day for 2) plus side events and a shirt. If you take away all of that but keep the prizes (including the shirt) and format, then I could be got for about $40. No shirt, no deal
  22. Slicer tools. Seriously. The only anti-slicer tech in all of the top 4 lists, maybe/ironically, was Hera. And comms net/Hondo for tokens. I get that killing the combo is hard, especially against seasoned players, but we just saw that even seasoned players can make big mistakes at high levels. Slicer away Yavaaris commands at the end of a round and kill it the next while simultaneously threatening a key squad. That’s easy enough with demo (which can survive regular squad attacks for a round). Rieekan is neutered in that context. Lets go back and look at list compositions to see just how many people brought slicers out to play (and while I’m at it, can anyone direct me to postings of the final standing from both days? First time back on in a while, and there’s lots to go through).
  23. But then we get pigeonholed into using a single Commander and/or a single upgrade (both of the same faction) to make the objective viable as is. I think your point is valid, in that they can make the objective useful for second player, but it doesn’t address the objective in the wider game. It still offers the second player no inherent advantage.
  24. But according to the RRG, we can be gentlemen about it and let FFG take back their move...
×
×
  • Create New...