Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
xero989

AMM, the new ace cap

Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, slasher956 said:

Just a thought ...if aces arent the same as uniques a core rule change could allow multiple black sqns going forward.....

 

"Aces with defence tokens" which allows "Aces without defence tokens".

Colloquial terms are "uniques" and "Geniques". 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a small change, which is better than doing something drastic, but as a result I don't think it changes much, as you point out it means taking the best 4 aces for your build, which will mean we see less of "not best" aces.

 

I don't think it will please people who don't like squad heavy at all, being on the receiving end of the squad ball will not feel very different.

 

Hopefully combined with a neff on Slone because she is still obnoxious, need to play her to find a weakness as she still seems too good.

 

I am less optimistic that going medium squads is going to viable, 4 aces and full 130 with carriers still seem enough to wipe out 60pts, but will have to see, maybe the new squads with the new factions will shake things up too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think medium squad builds will be even more viable. Just 4 aces and no other squads, vs. someone with 4 aces and 4 squads without defense tokens...you should at least be able to take out some of those squads with no defense tokens, especially if you were able to invest in flak ships with those extra points you've saved.

Also, I think the blog post makes a good point that it's not really clear which squad builds are the "best" now, so you may see some really diverse lists. As opposed to Sloane's Hateful Eight being done ad nauseam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Luckily you can still get 8 uniques with Riekan...lol.   And just have Jan behind to guard them. 

 

 

Edit:   I should have read the article lol.  But yah this really changes nothing.   Marrek Jendon and 2 friends for imps.  as well.   Less variety...but forced generics.   Not sure I am fan of that.  When point changes would make decision making more interesting.   The flotilla nerf (quantity restriction)  was also ham handed. 

Edited by Mogrok

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Pwmf said:

I am less optimistic that going medium squads is going to viable, 4 aces and full 130 with carriers still seem enough to wipe out 60pts, but will have to see, maybe the new squads with the new factions will shake things up too.

Sure it's enough to wipe out 60 points eventually but if that 60 points is a screen to let the rest of your fleet do work and win the game it doesn't really matter.  I mean sure if you want that 10-1 every game every point counts but if you are just trying to win sacrificing 60 points for the overall win seems like a good trade off to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was talking tournament games because that's the only yard stick we have and the only data point, and in my experience 60pts of squads can't slow down 130pts enough to justify its self and the 60pts lost, I think the general player response has been all or nothing (the developers have reached the conclusion that's what we are doing too) because nothing you have spent those 60pts on the ships and that is more significant in winning the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would people prefer an ace 'tax' ie, to take a (for example) TIE ace you need 2 generics?

2 hours ago, Pwmf said:

Hopefully combined with a neff on Slone because she is still obnoxious, need to play her to find a weakness as she still seems too good.

Make her rules an OR?  so you either take the accuracy or you take the re-roll - declare before rolling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Pwmf said:

I was talking tournament games because that's the only yard stick we have and the only data point, and in my experience 60pts of squads can't slow down 130pts enough to justify its self and the 60pts lost, I think the general player response has been all or nothing (the developers have reached the conclusion that's what we are doing too) because nothing you have spent those 60pts on the ships and that is more significant in winning the game.

Purely personal perspective here and everyone's MMV but my feeling is if 10-1 wins are all that bring you satisfaction maybe Armada isn't the right game.  Don't get me wrong, I play to win but that is it, I let the points lie where they lie.  Again personally a Tournament is just an opportunity to get 3 games in, not something I go in thinking I have a chance to win (although it would be nice to win one eventually and no I don't count the 3 person tournament I "won").  

I personally just get more enjoyment out of the game that way but if the 10-1 is your goal maybe sacrificing 60 points to Obi-Wan's force ghost isn't the best approach.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Thrindal said:

I personally just get more enjoyment out of the game that way but if the 10-1 is your goal maybe sacrificing 60 points to Obi-Wan's force ghost isn't the best approach.

Well of course not. It's not a tale the Jedi would tell you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A good read as always xero, thanks for the article.

To the discussion here and the common criticism I keep seeing regarding the nerf not removing the core of the Imperial Ace Ball; I think the Cap is probably a net good for the squadron minigame, and I think MMJ is its own issue that is best fixed with point adjustments or nerfs to Mareek/Jendon. Morna I think is actually just fine given her point cost, her problem is Jendon's existence. But this move wasn't meant to fix the synergy between those three squadrons and looking at it through that lens is missing the point. It was meant to fix the general issue that if you are bringing 134 points of squadrons, then the aces as a rule are simply too efficient for their cost. This lead to 134pt ace balls over-performing some, and it restricted player choice in the competitive sphere (since not going aces was very often a sub-optimal choice. I'm not saying there weren't great ways to use generics before this, there were plenty, but aces were often enough a better choice to warrant the change) So you can't bring all Aces anymore, if you want to invest in 134 points of squads, you now have to bring somewhat less point efficient generic squadrons. Both existing factions have ways to make this work for them, amongst them some of the options highlighted in Xero's article. We'll see what comes of it in time.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

You can get a 10/1 and lose your 60 point squad ball. Happens all the time. A 10/1 is an mov of 300+. So just table the opponent and lose less than 99 points. Easy.

Or make extra points from fire lanes, sensor net, and most wanted.

My 88 point squad ball is just fine, thank you very much.

Edited by LTD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tried a simple Dodonna list yesterday, with the Ace cap in mind.

Ended up with Dutch, Wedge, Luke, and Jan.

Gold is also kosher, as it has no tokens. For the rest, 2 Y-wing and 1 B-wing.

It worked well enough, and it felt pretty nice actually, to not have an all-ace crew.

If I had been running Rieekan instead, I could jam in stuff like Green and Dagger, no problem.

The flip side is that it's still a fact that some aces are really really good for their price, and others aren't.

So while this will bring more generics to the table, it won't bring a wider spread of aces. For that to happen, things would have to have their cost adjusted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/11/2020 at 5:10 AM, Ginkapo said:

"Aces with defence tokens" which allows "Aces without defence tokens".

Colloquial terms are "uniques" and "Geniques". 

Isn't "ace" the colloquial term and "unique squadron" the actual rules term?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Vlad3theImpaler said:

Isn't "ace" the colloquial term and "unique squadron" the actual rules term?

 

5 hours ago, Green Knight said:

Seems "ace" has become the informal term for "unique squadron with defense tokens".

 

Both of these are technically correct.

 

"Ace" was originally just meaning Unique Squadron.  Because you only had the 2 types - Aces and Generics.

The inclusion of the Unique Squadrons *without* Defense tokens did spur a naming contest of sorts, and many seemed to finish on "Genique" or some variant thereof.

 

But the limit is specifically to apply to Unique Squadrons with Defense Tokens.  because under teh current rules framework, its impossible to track and therefore have Generic squadrons with Tokens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm still a proponent of requiring each unique to be accompanied by a generic, 1 for 1. So, to take Mauler and Howlrunner you will need to have 2+ TIE generics.

Two primary reasons:

1) Generics rarely see the table. Meaning about half the squadrons never see play. This is lame.

2) All unique builds are still extremely strong, slow to play (with all their special rules) and make partial squad builds useless.

The current upcoming squad change barely addresses either of the above, definitely not #1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Thraug said:

I'm still a proponent of requiring each unique to be accompanied by a generic, 1 for 1. So, to take Mauler and Howlrunner you will need to have 2+ TIE generics.

Two primary reasons:

1) Generics rarely see the table. Meaning about half the squadrons never see play. This is lame.

2) All unique builds are still extremely strong, slow to play (with all their special rules) and make partial squad builds useless.

The current upcoming squad change barely addresses either of the above, definitely not #1.

I use generic rebel squads all the time. Its fairly common to hear of people using a pair of some kind of generic for Rebels. Xwings and BWings probably the most common. But I see generic, Awings, Ywings, Ewings, VCX, and 1300s in lists. 

 

Sure, I rarely see generic Z95s, but I rarely see the ace either. I also rarely see generic lancers in lists. 
 

But yeah. No generics get taken. Clearly a problem. 

 

Also, I’ve never seen players run generic interceptors with RHDs. Ever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Church14 said:

I use generic rebel squads all the time. Its fairly common to hear of people using a pair of some kind of generic for Rebels. Xwings and BWings probably the most common. But I see generic, Awings, Ywings, Ewings, VCX, and 1300s in lists. 

 

Sure, I rarely see generic Z95s, but I rarely see the ace either. I also rarely see generic lancers in lists. 
 

But yeah. No generics get taken. Clearly a problem. 

 

Also, I’ve never seen players run generic interceptors with RHDs. Ever.

Not sure if you were being sarcastic or not, but here is the first of four BATREPs with my Sloane Interceptor/RHD list during one of our mini-events.  Pretty effective combination.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Admiral Calkins said:

Not sure if you were being sarcastic or not, but here is the first of four BATREPs with my Sloane Interceptor/RHD list during one of our mini-events.  Pretty effective combination.

It was sarcasm. But you also helped drive my point home so I call it a win. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...