Jump to content

Back Seat Admiral

Members
  • Content Count

    8
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Back Seat Admiral

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Just wanted to get the opinion of the forum- is the tier 2 gunnery ability “ion technician” too good for the effect and the cost? I have played against it a few times and starting to feel like it is an auto include in just about any fleet. This to me represents an ability that is too good. If it is, how could you temper it? Limit to short-medium? Once per activation? Flagship only? As it stands, it is essentially a BETTER DTT on every ship ( I say better bc blue dice ALWAYS improve blanks)- should an ability give you an effect that would cost 15+points in a fleet build?
  2. For real! I don’t even know why they had that in there. Even without it, it is an okay card, but not an auto include by any stretch.
  3. really feel this should have the engineering activation symbol removed and replace point with value. You are playing 5 points and giving up a support spot. How broken is 5 engineering value?
  4. I have thought of ways to improve Tagge as well, and it is NOT easy. Even keeping to the spirit of the ability, the best I came up with was put 2 objective tokens on him at the start of the game and remove one at the beginning of the round to “activate” his written ability. Not sure if that control makes him good enough, but it would be better.
  5. I know that there have been a number iterations if this type of game, so forgive me if this one has been “played” already. Here is the rule: By ONLY either adding or removing a single sentence or symbol from an existing card, how can you make a “Meh” card much better. No adjusting points, reworking the entire card, etc... I’ll start: Add on to Garm’s text “Your ships can be have the number of command tokens of any type equal your command value plus 1”. This simple adjustment that gives Garm better value at 25 points. Your turn:
  6. Desperately seeking the help of the community. I made the cardinal sin if not leaving well enough alone on my Mac and update to Catalina. This has me reinstall java, vassal, and the modules. I can’t get the vassal application to recognize the armada modules. I am currently scouring the internets for a solution, but not able to hone in on this specific problem. I have already Adjusted my security settings and such for vassal and java, but can’t get them to connect with the module. Any help would be appreciated in this time of home isolation. Thanks all!
  7. It may already be obvious, but this salvo attack that you are making with dcaps has to come AFTER your activation. You can’t choose to pop them when you are declared the target of an attack, only when you activate. Useful, but the timing is not ideal.
  8. Long time reader, first time poster of this forum. I need the communities help in resolving a dispute among our group with pivotal battles. We are about to have our first and cannot agree whether or not the defending player gets to use base defenses when the assaulting player chooses “Conquest”. There is a bit of ambiguity on the descriptions that could be interpreted differently. Evacuation clearly states to use this objective WITH Base Defense objectives Conquest says to the battle is treated as a base location, when can be interpreted differently than evacuation. Thematically, it feels like they Should be able to use Base Defenses. If they can’t be used, why would the assaulting player ever NOT CHOOSE Conquest? It would be the easiest of the three as it gives NO benefits to the 2nd player ( something that armada strives for). Unless this is the point to keep the campaign self balancing. How have your groups been playing these pivotal battles?
×
×
  • Create New...