FFG talking about nerfing demo..

[Vykes 1,927]

If they do, fine.  If they don't, that's alright, too.  Demolisher is by no means an insta-win, and while the title itself is good (arguably disproportionately so), it does take some skill to get the most out of it.  With Wave 3, 4, and even 5 coming, we will have more tools to deal with that ship.  I do think that title was a misstep, but one born out of early necessity to some degree.  

 

That said, 'hearsay' isn't exactly something I'm going to count on to fix my Demolisher woes.   FFG did take action when the Phantom's cloaking ability was perceived to be an issue in X-wing,  Given the recent and historical tournament results, it's at least worth reviewing the Demolisher title even if nothing changes.  

 

My issue is more the way in which the title interacts with the platform's upgrades rather than any inherent ability.  The most dangerous Demolisher combination (thus far) is expensive.   Pointless anecdote time: I went 3-0 and got second spot at my regional here, tangled with Demo twice in three games and killed it both times. The trade up wasn't particularly good: I think Yavaris once, and my Dodonna RAF the second time.  Trading up a fully blown Demo is possible, but the targets become tougher and the margin of error gets smaller.  None of this is occurring in a vacuum, so 'just take X-ship combination at Y-time, and at Z-distance it's as good as dead!.  So long as conditions A, B, and C are also met," isn't the best test of Demo or a Demo-Hunter's real abilities.  Demo won't always get the best attack vector, and the defender won't always have the luxury of a hundred-odd points to spare for an anti-Demo ship.  None of that is news to anyone.  Neither is the revelation that a GSD is not exactly the most beefy platform.  Demo is a great theory ship that happens to translate fairly well to the tabletop as it doesn't require a lot of outside conditions to get consistent results.  It's not a situational title so it usually sees some added value compared to other titles.  

[Sybreed 1,110]

I think people are seeing the Demolisher issue wrong. Just ask yourself this question:

 

You have a Gladiator and enough points for a title. What will you take?

 

a) Insidious?

 

Or

 

b) Demolisher?

 

If the answer is always b) whatever the scenario, then you have a balance issue.

[Jondavies72 575]

I think what people miss is that There's nothing wrong with a lack of balance in indidual components, that's fine, as long as there are lots of ways to make competitive fleets on both sides, I'm fine with some individual components being a bit overpowered. It's about balance within the whole game.

Saying if you had the points would you take insid or demo is not the whole story, the question you ask is what would you do with ten points..... So would you take insid on your glad and gunnery teams on your isd two or leave gunnery teams out and take Demo..... Or..... Not have a glad at all, or squeeze in a basic glad as blocker......any other of the hundreds of small variations you can make to a fleet,.....you need to take ships and upgrades as part of a whole not as individuals.......

What I'm saying is is Demo a bit OP, maybe yes... Does it matter......no not really.

Edited August 7, 2016 by Jondavies72

[Ginkapo 9,320]

There is one other change that will impact radically. The new objectives.

 

If you have a fleet with a Gladiator and strong red and blue objectives then the obvious title inclusion is no longer Demolisher. Insidious is the king of Hyperspace Assault. Currently, its tough to build around three objectives to such a degree as first player is a little too strong, however, with new objectives this should be possible, and suddenly Insidious will live long and prospure.

[thecactusman17 3,192]

If FFG nerfs Demolisher, it will only be to promote greater list diversity.  As has been noted above,  Demolisher isn't the be all ends all,  and in the final GenCon game its primary contribution was unexpectedly flipping the perfect card to trigger repeatedly with precision strike.

[TheEasternKing 607]

I think people are seeing the Demolisher issue wrong. Just ask yourself this question:

 

You have a Gladiator and enough points for a title. What will you take?

 

a) Insidious?

 

Or

 

b) Demolisher?

 

If the answer is always b) whatever the scenario, then you have a balance issue.

 

Yeah, because the game is not full of ship titles that never get used, or do ultra rarely in comparison to the other titles for that ship.

[TallGiraffe 3,447]

Also look at what other ships the imperials can field. VSDs are slow and will be squad pushers probably while Raiders are too fragile to put down effective anti ship fire without dying quickly.

[Sybreed 1,110]

 

I think people are seeing the Demolisher issue wrong. Just ask yourself this question:

 

You have a Gladiator and enough points for a title. What will you take?

 

a) Insidious?

 

Or

 

b) Demolisher?

 

If the answer is always b) whatever the scenario, then you have a balance issue.

 

Yeah, because the game is not full of ship titles that never get used, or do ultra rarely in comparison to the other titles for that ship.

 

 

that isn't my point at all.

 

If you pick a Gladiator, you'll go for demolisher 99% of the time before going Insidious.

[Vykes 1,927]

I think people are seeing the Demolisher issue wrong. Just ask yourself this question:

 

You have a Gladiator and enough points for a title. What will you take?

 

a) Insidious?

 

Or

 

b) Demolisher?

 

If the answer is always b) whatever the scenario, then you have a balance issue.

  I to think it goes one step beyond this.  "If you have a Gladiator, which do you take?  A) Insidious, B) Demolisher, C) a non-titled GSD"  The answer is functionally always B first.  That's displaying an issue to me.  Even the Nebulon B isn't quite that cut and dried.  

 

Also look at what other ships the imperials can field. VSDs are slow and will be squad pushers probably while Raiders are too fragile to put down effective anti ship fire without dying quickly.

Aye, that was what I was thinking too.  the GSD and VSD's were paired up when the Imperials didn't have enormous amounts of long range firepower, and fewer effective ways to make Rebels engage them at point black range (sp, har har).  Wave 2 brought us Raiders and the ISD which gave us alternatives with equal or greater speeds compared to rebel ships. 

[SkyCake 1,183]

Targeting scrambler is going to be so good.... even if they reroll good on one tap, they probably won't reroll good on the second or third tap, whichever requires the scrambler... they won't have Intel officer because they'll need nav officer due to slicer tools... I think demo's stick is probably going to decline in coming waves... no need to fix title overtly, they have already done it through the release of other ships/upgrades and we haven't even seen all of wave 5

[TallGiraffe 3,447]

Once we get the new ships, especially the Arquitens, Demo will seem less an auto include in the game.

[Caldias 2,209]

The only thing that really sucks about Demolisher is its ability to alpha-strike from outside striking distance.  Yes, I've fought and killed many a Demolisher flown by skilled opponents, and won many a game against them, but the ability to reach out beyond red range and throw black crits is just a skosh too good in my opinion.  And I honestly don't think you'll see less Demolisher.  Gozantis/Arquitens will just let you go with even higher activation builds, only now with squadrons.

 

Target Scrambler is the best thing to come out that poos on Demo, but it is one faction only.  

[TheEasternKing 607]

Want to know how often I get to use black dice not on Demolisher?

 

Or in fact, want to know how often I get to use them not in a fleet designed to be player one, and have a high ship activation?.

 

All of which is about to go out of the window.

Edited August 7, 2016 by TheEasternKing

[Lyraeus 4,759]

Michael Pena says... I know a guy who knows a guy...  :-)

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lYUFx_Ltjn8

 

As Schmitty pointed out to me, and I've posted my thoughts elsewhere on Demo and Rhymer... perhaps, FFG just wants more diversity in lists?  I think the subject is plausible.

With 2 waves coming up and a 3rd after world's I think they might wait till world's

[Wes Janson 1,184]

I always take Insidious to buck the system. The few times in standard play I have got to use it have been gravy.

[comatose 552]

To take some of the rumor out, I spoke directly with one of the developers at Gen Con about point bidding and Demolisher. I won't say his name so he doesn't end up with hate mail.

The main reason I talked to him was a non-Demolisher issue I felt that went against the spirit of the game that was brought about by the point bidding meta game. Demolisher by itself isn't the issue, it's also a little bit of the point bidding dynamics. The Demolisher double tap is the biggest unbalanced combo in the game because some reasonable die rolling has a chance to take down an ISD with no counter attack.

He agreed and mentioned that they are considering multiple possibilities.

[Amanal 2,557]

A friend and I have played lots of games, when he plays a Demolisher list he will win about 80% of our games, any other games we would go about 50/50.

 

So if they do something that puts us on a 50/50 regardless of list that would be nice, I am not too sure that Slicer Beams will be a counter to Demolisher.

[Lyraeus 4,759]

Slicer Beams is going to go a ways to helping work on Demolisher I think. It might not fully counter Demolisher but it is a great trap.

[Wes Janson 1,184]

I nerfed it by not using it ever again. I feel dirty even putting it on the table. You can see it in your oppnents eyes, that look of ...

[HERO 842]

To take some of the rumor out, I spoke directly with one of the developers at Gen Con about point bidding and Demolisher. I won't say his name so he doesn't end up with hate mail.

The main reason I talked to him was a non-Demolisher issue I felt that went against the spirit of the game that was brought about by the point bidding meta game. Demolisher by itself isn't the issue, it's also a little bit of the point bidding dynamics. The Demolisher double tap is the biggest unbalanced combo in the game because some reasonable die rolling has a chance to take down an ISD with no counter attack.

He agreed and mentioned that they are considering multiple possibilities.

 

Consider my interest peaked.

 

However, I'm willing to entertain the prospect the certain tractor-related/G-8/target scrambling mechanics will not instill the fear into Demolisher players.

[ImpStarDeuces 526]

To take some of the rumor out, I spoke directly with one of the developers at Gen Con about point bidding and Demolisher. I won't say his name so he doesn't end up with hate mail.

The main reason I talked to him was a non-Demolisher issue I felt that went against the spirit of the game that was brought about by the point bidding meta game. Demolisher by itself isn't the issue, it's also a little bit of the point bidding dynamics. The Demolisher double tap is the biggest unbalanced combo in the game because some reasonable die rolling has a chance to take down an ISD with no counter attack.

He agreed and mentioned that they are considering multiple possibilities.

My money is on a change to the initiative system itself.

 

Disclaimer: This isn't an attack on people who bid for the initiative. That's the way the game is and power to you.

 

However, the initiative system is an odd beast in Armada. In every almost every game system, being first play is considered a powerful advantage so they usually try to provide benefits tot he second player to balance the game. Armada is the only game that I can think of where you can basically guarantee yourself first player by bidding. X-wing allows you to bid as well but player turns are more dictated by PS.

 

Right now the bid system puts Armada in an odd place from a game design perspective. Right now, most people consider being first player to be more powerful than having choice of objective. Not only that, but this means the game system actually rewards people for bringing less stuff. In order to counteract this, the designers are probably going to have to ratchet up the objective bonuses which may be difficult and it would leave a lot of the current objectives out to dry.

 

An easy fix would be to make the first player decision random but provide a slight bonus to the decision for someone who bids for it. An example of this is that to determine first player, you flip a coin, and the person who has the least points can force a re-flip if it isn't in their favor. This would force people to not only consider both first and second player position more seriously, it would leave Demolisher intact but force people not to bank on first player. This would also open up some game design since people can't guarantee the initiative so they can't really game for it, so you can be safe releasing more cards similar to Demolisher, or even cards that could directly affect initiative order (like a commander card for Thrawn which i think would be awesome).

[HERO 842]

Roll and D6 and I get +1 to go first?

[Caldias 2,209]

I still like the idea that the player with less activations gets to pick initiative.  Activation advantage is the biggest deal, and having a last/first is really strong.

[ImpStarDeuces 526]

Roll and D6 and I get +1 to go first?

Man, this brings back memories of Warhammer. Not that newfangled round based mumbo jumbo either.

[Lyraeus 4,759]

Why would they change the initiative system? Not just a single 2 ship list made it to the top tables but two made it there. There is nothing wrong with the initiative system.