• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Space_Cowboy17

  • Rank
  • Birthday
  1. Regionals data Feb 17

    @geek19 I am suggesting that some who is out activated has to move with less information available to them at the time of making the decision. Getting into black range is a skill, but having all but one variable fixed before making a decision is easier than when there are more things out of your control, this issue is made worse when one of those variables is twice as erratic since it gets to move twice. Like I was pointing out with the chess, Imperial Assault, and Legion examples, this is a known issue that many games choose to address in order to prevent exactly this disparity in mental load, in an effort to create a more fair play experience for both players.
  2. Regionals data Feb 17

    @UndeadguyThat is not an overload list. You are taking 4 real ships and a flotilla. There is a huge difference between taking that, and taking an ISD and 4-5 Flotillas put in the list only to increase the activation count.
  3. Regionals data Feb 17

    @Undeadguy Play what you want, but don't look me in the eye and tell me you are having to do as much mental work as me to win a game when you get to move 2 times back to back every turn and I don't. The amount of predictive power it takes to counter and anticipate a double move is far greater than the mental power it takes to look at the board and move your ship into and out of range once the other guy is activated out... That's just called driving.
  4. Regionals data Feb 17

    You gotta admit that it makes a lot more sense in the absence of a double move mechanic.
  5. Regionals data Feb 17

    @Undeadguy All I am suggesting is that people avoid the overload principle since it is an easy button. Take solid, well thought out combined arms fleets that allow for all the generalist lists that are being squeezed out at the top tables to also have a chance since they don't have to live in fear of being overloaded. I think making flotillas not count for tabling would introduce enough risk into spamming for activation advantage, that we would see less people trying to overload with activations. @Ginkapo Leveraging First/Last, or leveraging Objective Farming are both examples of overloading, they may balance out, assuming they face off against each other, but what about everyone in between that does not play to one of these extremes? Do they just not get to have a fair game because they did not conform to the meta? Combined fire is one way to kill stuff quickly as you pointed out. BTA, Triple Tap Demo, Last/First Yavaris, (maybe Raddus MC75) have ways to deal with tokens too and also kill stuff quickly, but with a single ship (Which you can hide with Last/First). The difference is that the opponent gets more chance to react to a group of ships, but does not get to react to a Last/First attack from a single ship. Hence why last/first is bad.
  6. Regionals data Feb 17

    I have not lost a game against an MC 30 or activation spam fleets in over 18 months, but that is not the point. My personal play has no bearing on observation. You telling me to play better does nothing to refute my assertion that Last/First, while counterable as we all know, limits one players ability to react to the other players moves during a crucial moment in the game. That is one of the negative effects of overload as we have discussed above. The limiting of one players ability to interact in the game and make meaningful decisions is removed. Black dice ships should be very hard to deliver, they are very potent so they should be hard to use. Last/First lowers the barrier of effectively using them considerably. Why do we suppose other games such as Imperial Assault, Legion, and Infinity, have Hold actions or pass actions included in their alternating activation game systems if not to address this exact problem? Why don't chess matches allow one player to move 2 pieces back to back? Why not in Checkers, Go, or any other strategy game that is played at a highly competitive level? Because that would upset the games balance by allowing one player more chances to affect the board than the other. Activation count overload is aimed at creating an advantage built around this very concept that so many long standing and highly respected games prevent, and they prevent it for a very good reason.
  7. Regionals data Feb 17

    Bail and Pryce are in fact geared to address this issue, but can only be on one ship, and can only work on one telegraphed turn, and can be used against you if the timing is off, or is forced off your opponent. They are limp wristed attempts to address a deeply rooted problem. If these 2 cards are in fact the answer to all our problems, show me the data. I have not seen either of them widely used to great effect in the lists we have been receiving. The list we keep seeing win are still of the 1+4 or 2+3 variety in most cases. Would it not be better to address the issue directly than slap together some edge case options for a single ship within a fleet. These are counter plays we all know about and understand, why bring them up like this is news to people? The fact of the matter is, it is very powerful to get to back to back activate a ship, we all know it so just admit it. We must like this arbitrary time warp every turn, that doubles the speed of one ship, and temporarily disables the weapons on an opposing ship, based on the fact that 40,000 klicks away there happen to be 3 transports running away from the battle.
  8. Regionals data Feb 17

    See I think the better approach would be to not rush straight in, an MC 30 is fast for a reason, so it can flank out wide and come in on angles that don't allow the big ships to get good arcs on them, specially if the shotgun rushers split up and come in from both sides. As it stands, most black dice ships sit out of range at speed 2 and bank tokens, then perform a headlong charge directly at their target at speed 4 in the last activation, then activate first, double arc and leave. (Who didn't see that coming, your so good at this game...) Because the system only allows you to effectively double activate 1 ship per turn, you end up with a congo line of ships doing this one turn after another. This tactic is a clear result of the last/first mechanic. If the large ship saw a congo line of small rushers coming in it would be trivial to blast them down one at a time if they were foolish enough to drive straight at their best arc all alone. The game mechanics allow this ridiculous tactic to be viable based on activation order limitations. A more realistic tactic would be to swarm the large target from all sides at the same time, overwhelming the large ships ability to react to all the threats being presented. This would be both more realistic, AND allow the large ships commander to get to make choices about what ships to fire at in order to lessen the damage. As it stand, the large ships captain has very little say about what happens because they cannot react to a double activation. If you see a line of short range ships approaching in a single file line, setting up to take bombing passes at you, would you really be dumb enough to ignore the LEAD SHIP long enough to let it move from the extreme of your weapons range into their range, unload its salvo, and then jet away out of arc and ride off into the sunset without reacting to it at all? If your captain is actually that stupid, do you think he would continue to make that same mistake over and over again as the next ship in line comes in to do the same exact thing? This realistic example gets even more absurd when it is done using 4-5 useless non-combat ships and one Large ship. Who does not see this coming. How dumb do you have to be in order to allow and ISD or MC80 to close on you like this when it is clearly the only combat threat opposing you. The first/last mechanic makes no real world sense at all, and is bad for gameplay, because it removes one players chance to react to the opponents action. Most games that alternate activations, including Legion from what I can tell, counter this with a Hold action that lets an early activation unit wait to fire until the enemy approaches, to combat exactly this kind of ridiculous tactic. Not saying that we need something like this in Armada because that starts a whole new line of thinking, but activation parity also blocks this stuff and does not change the rest of the game as much. Other games see the issue and take steps to block this kind of stuff... for a reason.
  9. Regionals data Feb 17

    Based on the results we are seeing, what makes you think anything will change because of wave 7. This wave offers some soft counters at best. FFG should have paired the Wave 7 release with the long over due flotillas count for tabling nerf, then we would see real change. Someone above expressed a concern about getting to use black dice ships without Last/First. Do you really think that in open space, with only a few asteroids floating around (basically no cover to hide behind), an ordnance ship completely ignored and would be allowed to just fly in unopposed without taking long range fire from the enemy on the approach? Does that not make absolute sense? SHotgun rushers have to be prepared to take a hit on the way in. Black dice are very powerful, they therefore should be hard to use. Last/First is an easy work around that makes them easy to use. Easy to use, and stronger than the other weapons in the game should not go together. Easy to use stuff should do sub par damage Hard to use stuff should do above par damage The issue is that activation spam lets you take hard to use weapons, that do above par damage, and turn them into easy to use weapons by exploiting the weak point of last/first in the rule set. Some of the most common examples include: The Demo triple tap, the Yavaris Bomb, etc. Powerful abilities should be hard to deliver. We should not applaud workarounds that make them easy to deliver by out mathing the enemy into getting first/lasted. For clarity, the reason I say "out mathing," is because first/last is determined before play begins, in the list building phase. It comes down to guessing what bid to take and guessing what number of activations to bring and is decided before the game starts. Some see this as a skill, but it can often end up creating a situation where when 2 fleets built this way match up, the winner is the one who built their fleet to outbid and activate the other, making match ups very critical and forcing he other player to play at a steep disadvantage. Getting lucky and drawing match-ups you outbid can then have more bearing on your results than your games then the play on the tabletop. :-(
  10. Regionals data Feb 17

    List building is a fun and important part of the game, but with the easy access to the tops list and the principles that make them up being on line, it really is not that important of a skill. Lists should be focused, have a plan for victory, and we well reasoned, but when they aim to win by exploiting the known weaknesses of the rule set to limit interaction, it is an abuse that lessens the experience for both parties, both the one running the list that has the advantage, and the one that is at the disadvantage. The only fight worth winning ins a fair one, in a setting where we do this as an activity between 2 adults looking to engage in an intellectual contest. This is NOT WAR, these peole you are playing are friends and they deserve a fair game, just like you hope to have.
  11. Regionals data Feb 17

    I have been asked to more clearly define a skew list, I can't really do it any better than ImpStarDeuces just has. Lists that are built to have a mix of ship and squadron fire power, and that do not intend to try and cash in on the sad, logical absurdity that we should all avoid, that is the entire last/first mechanic, are less prone to match up dependency. Lists that aim to win by dominating the activation count are directly playing on this known and well documented weakness in the game system, with the intent being to make it easier for them to attack the enemy fleet without the chance for a reaction from the opponent. The lack of a chance to react is the key issue with this overload tactic. Overload prevents the interplay between the competitors. A max squadron list that relays from across the board with out spending any points on actual fighting ships in a similar way, is removing the opponent's ability to meaningfully effect the game. Their ships are almost useless in this type of game for want of a meaningful target that must approach within range of them. With the end result being again to reduce interaction between the players. Objective/Token Farm Overload aims to win the game by farming points much more effectively than the opponent. This type of overload wants to be so much better at making point via objectives that the enemy has no chance to keep up. This overload is mitigated somewhat by the opposing player's chance to make a choice about which mission they want to play and thus is not a great of an issue, though it does seek to win without having to meet the enemy in actual battle. Overload style lists are powerful and popular because by eliminating the amount of interaction the opponent has in the game, players can perform better than they would normally in a contest between 2 non-overload lists. What is the best way to beat someone that is a better player than you? Make sure they don't have any meaningful choices to make by taking a list that eliminates their choices via the overload principle. By avoiding overload, specifically overload that leverages the known weaknesses of the rule set, you insure that your opponent also has the same opportunity to showcase their tactical skill. An opportunity that you would also hope for in a game of Armada if the roles were reversed.
  12. Regionals data Feb 17

    I oppose skew lists for the same reasons Imp Dueces is pointing out. Skew or overload lists are successful because they win by dominating an aspect of the game so heavily that the other player has little chance of matching them in their particular area of expertise. What this tends to do, is create a meta where one overload list becomes dominant, then as a response, another list rises to counter it that is often its own version of an overload list. This cycle continues, like in San Antonio, and you end up with several typically played overload principle based lists. This can be seen a diversity if you want, but in most cases it makes life very hard for non-overload lists to function because they can not hope to match an overload list in its area of expertise, and when they are having to figure out how to address 2-3 different types of overload threats, the number of viable all-comers options gets pretty small. The result is pressure on players to not run what they want, but to adopt their own overload list in order to do survive. Players that want their lists to win games for them take the overload style lists, hoping to do well by overloading the all-comers lists, and hoping to draw good matchups against the other overload lists. The frustration is that overload lists are very matchup dependent when they face off. Often much of the game is decided before the battle based on how the 2 fleets interact mechanically (Bid, activation count, deployment count, squadron composition, etc.). With player skill taking a back seat to the mechanics of the fleet match-up. Since the process of getting good match-ups is left largely up to chance, success is often more about who got lucky and got the favorable match-ups than who is the best player. WE DON'T WANT GAMES TO BE INFLUENCED HEAVILY BY THE MATCH-UP IF WE WANT PLAYER SKILL TO DICTATE OVERALL SUCCESS. Generalist lists have a hard time functioning in a meta flooded with overload oriented lists because it is very tough to be prepared for 2-3 different types of overload threats. Generalist lists run the risk of losing to a less skilled player using a skew list, that is well tailored to overwhelm the generalists diluted counter strategy. This is a sad result because it is my belief that the most rewarding games are those between 2 generalist fleets that do not have a huge list based advantage over the opponent. These type of games are the ones that allow the players, not their lists or match-up luck, to determine success. To Long Didn't Read: Overload lists drive out all-comers lists and make match-ups a huge deal, sometimes overshadowing player skill in deciding games. All-comers lists encourage tactically deep, FAIR, games, where each player can determine their fate, not the match-up
  13. Regionals data Feb 17

    You know the point I am making about adults. We are all smart enough to see the rule systems shortcomings. We also for the most part do not like these shortcomings, and speak out against it with the multiple threads dedicated to how to address flotillas, relay, activation advantage, first/last issues, etc. What frustrates me, is that no matter how people may complain about it and lobby for change, when the lights come on and it is game time, we throw all that out the window and go running to the most OP thing we can come up with. We would have a much more accessible and tactically deep game if we avoided skewed lists that attempt to win by overloading a particular weak point of the game (overload on squads w/ no real combat ships to leverage squad effeciency, or overload on activations to avoid having to make activation decisions), but to field such a well rounded list requires confidence, and a willingness to backup what you say when you criticize the rule sets issues. Not much of that going on these days. Overpowered stuff is bad because it gives an advantage to one player vs another, who are of equal tactical skill and ability. If you will throw out your convictions about what is good and bad for the game just to achieve such an advantage, you are not backing up what you say.
  14. Regionals data Feb 17

    So the solution to a problem is not self-restraint, or self-moderation (an adult and responsible approach). Instead it is to play with your dangerous toy that hurts others as long, and as hard as you can, until daddy takes it away from you because it makes you feel powerful and "good," and if you don't hit people with it, daddy won't know it is dangerous...
  15. Regionals data Feb 17

    @BrobaFett I am concerned about placing well and winning events. I was they guy who placed 2nd at the Marrietta Regional, (missing 1st by 53 MOV) with a 4 ship Ackbar list, with only 1 flotilla and 81 points in squads. It can be done. The trend of taking the path of least resistance is the easy, cowardly way. Play to win, but play without intentionally trying to strain against the known and well documented shortcomings within the rule set. As if you are the only smart one who recognizes them. You, like many of us, agree that the Flotilla ruling should have been to not count for tabling instead of blocking the lifeboat strat. Who in the community opposes this, at this point? If we all want this... let's do it. FFG had a perfect chance to drop this FAQ along with Wave 7 and they didn't. They have had SC and Regional results rolling in all summer, fall and winter and yet here we set with no change. Again I ask, how long will we wait? Winning because you stretch the rule set is of no value, winning because you make better decisions on the tabletop is what should be praised and respected.