|
Tekopo posted:I'd still rather have Screed for 6 extra points over Ozzel. I actually re-read the article for Raiders and my god can that 'engage enemy squadrons like they would be facing 2' title absolutely wrecks squadrons. They can't move out, they can't shoot at the Raider, and with the way that the rounds work in Armada, having something shut down squadrons for 1 or 2 turns would be deadly. They can shoot the Raider, assuming no other enemy squadrons there. The rules for engagement is that you have to shoot fighters if able. If none are present you absolutely can shoot the Raider.
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2015 20:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 23:20 |
|
|
Yep, just double checked and you are correct. Whoever told me the ruling originally was wrong. Also the fleet I used in the final:  And this: 
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2015 11:01
|
|
|
susan posted:Just made final table at a Massing, using a list with two Neb-B's and 8 fighters. I have no idea how I did this. I really want to see your fleet specs and hear your strategy. I do best with fighter heavy lists, so how to best use them with Neb-Bs is really intriguing. On the other hand, I want to like Neb-Bs but they just get crushed every time I deploy them.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2015 01:44
|
|
|
CPA Hell posted:I really want to see your fleet specs and hear your strategy. I do best with fighter heavy lists, so how to best use them with Neb-Bs is really intriguing. On the other hand, I want to like Neb-Bs but they just get crushed every time I deploy them. 4 A-Wings, 4 Y-Wings, 2 Support Neb-B's and a kitted out Assault Frigate. The Neb-B's were almost entirely ineffectual, and died by turn 4 in all my games, but they did a little bit of damage beforehand and made my opponents drive in predictable directions so I could lay ambush fighter swarms in their way. It helped that a Neb-B Support costs less than a Gladiator, so the trading was almost always in my favor. It wasn't a great plan, but it worked out, and the Assault Frigate was an absolute boss. Neb-B's are probably going on the shelf after this, replaced by Corellian Corvettes that can actually spit the same amount of Red Dice out of their side arcs as a Neb-B Front Arc with Ackbar.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2015 06:12
|
|
|
Not that I've been successful yet, but I like how the neb B can take a turn or two of extra fire once it gets 'caught', whereas the corvettes really need to stay at long range to make the most of their evasion--and if they're running away, they probably won't be able to fire. I'll be interested to hear how you do when you switch out.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2015 18:56
|
|
|
So the Interdictor Cruiser makes a full fledged appearance in the (Canon) Star Wars Rebels preview so I'm wondering how soon we'd see it in Armada https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YfeWNZqVYsE About 30 seconds in I'm really happy about stuff from the WEG RPG and theold Canon making an appearance.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 04:35
|
|
|
Sushi in Yiddish posted:So the Interdictor Cruiser makes a full fledged appearance in the (Canon) Star Wars Rebels preview so I'm wondering how soon we'd see it in Armada Rebels is like the best thing to happen to Star Wars in 20 years. Perfect place for light EU integration.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 05:36
|
|
|
Was it someone here that posted the pics of the Armada fighters they had painted? If someone saved it, could they post it again? I'm needing a template/inspiration for my own little painting project 
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 16:17
|
|
|
Icon Of Sin posted:Was it someone here that posted the pics of the Armada fighters they had painted? If someone saved it, could they post it again? I'm needing a template/inspiration for my own little painting project Ask and you shall receive.    I've not had a chance to PLAY with them yet. To my shame.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 16:23
|
|
|
Went to a large X-Wing tourney and they had squadron movement rulers and shortened range rulers so I got some, so I can finally measure ranges without knocking everything away!
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 16:34
|
|
|
Grey Hunter posted:Ask and you shall receive. Man Armada looks cool as hell, shame its playerbase is much smaller than X-Wing (I guess because it's more expensive?)
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 17:10
|
|
|
Drone posted:Man Armada looks cool as hell, shame its playerbase is much smaller than X-Wing (I guess because it's more expensive?) It also came out later, after many people had already committed to X-wing. Given the choice I would play Armada but I have X-Wing figures because they were what was available. I deliberately remember thinking "drat, I'd rather have fleet scale battles with capital ships, but oh well this looks fun too" when X-wing came out. I'll just be damned if I'm gonna spend that much money on a second "Star Wars Space Ship Game For Two Players" when I already have one.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 17:14
|
|
|
I have mixed feelings in regards to Armada/X-Wing. I think X-Wing is a better tourney experience at the moment, I prefer some of the elements of the simultaneous movement system. The IGOUGO system of Armada is cool, but it puts an emphasis on having more ships, something that is acerbated by the initiative system and the importance it places on having a good enough bid. Some of the objective cards are pretty much trap choices as well and I think they could have been designed better. It is clear that Armada hasn't matured enough yet and I think after Wave II is out things will be a lot better: the game just does not feel balanced at 300 points at the moment and the lack of fighters in fleets reflects that.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 17:32
|
|
|
Tekopo posted:I have mixed feelings in regards to Armada/X-Wing. I think X-Wing is a better tourney experience at the moment, I prefer some of the elements of the simultaneous movement system. The IGOUGO system of Armada is cool, but it puts an emphasis on having more ships, something that is acerbated by the initiative system and the importance it places on having a good enough bid. Some of the objective cards are pretty much trap choices as well and I think they could have been designed better. There are some pretty cool things about Armada but its being a long game makes the tournaments a lot rougher to play and the wave 1 balance was a bit weak, not sure about wave 2 yet.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 18:30
|
|
|
*Is a game designer* Woah these fighters are so good! I mean wow these are some great fighters. These fighters are so good in fact that we must limit how many people can take. Any more than 1/3rd of fleet points in fighters would surely lead to Endless Fighter Domination, they must be kept in check!!! *winning fleets don't even field a single squadron*
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 18:36
|
|
|
I prefer armada to x-wing because it has more tactical elements. X-wing seems very rock-paper-scissors anymore.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 18:43
|
|
|
Drone posted:Man Armada looks cool as hell, shame its playerbase is much smaller than X-Wing (I guess because it's more expensive?) We're a smaller playerbase, but each of us represents a larger player.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 18:47
|
|
|
Reynold posted:I prefer armada to x-wing because it has more tactical elements. X-wing seems very rock-paper-scissors anymore. Maybe, maybe not, I haven't played enough Armada to tell (because man, if finding X-Wing players around where I live is hard, finding Armada players is impossible), but that said: Chomp8645 posted:*Is a game designer* At the moment Armada doesn't seem to have a whole lot of depth as far as fleet construction goes. It's probably an artifact of only having one current wave with a second just on the cusp of general release, but so far it feels very much like a game of "Oh, you're playing Imperials? Then go with this list. Rebels? Use these ships. No don't buy any fighters, just buy more Gladiators/Corvettes. There, now go." It's possible I'm not being as charitable as I should but the fact that fighter squadrons are generally seen as points that could be better spent on another capital ship is kind of disappointing for a Star Wars game imo.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 19:34
|
|
|
Chomp8645 posted:It also came out later, after many people had already committed to X-wing. X Wing core set is $40 MSRP. Armada core set is $100 MSRP. The individual ships are about 2x as expensive compared to their X-Wing counterparts (from an MSRP perspective). I'm not saying it's unreasonable. It just costs more on a per-ship basis (even if you're likely to field fewer total ships) I'll probably not get into Armada for the same reason (already financially committed to wangs and still having a lot of fun with it), but the longer game time is not appealing to me either. It's hard to find time to play X-Wing, it would be at least twice as hard for me to find time for a longer game.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 19:44
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:There are some pretty cool things about Armada but its being a long game makes the tournaments a lot rougher to play and the wave 1 balance was a bit weak, not sure about wave 2 yet. The tournament scoring system for Armada isn't the greatest either, and really skews the worth of a lot of objectives. I really like it for casual play, but I've been kind of turned off of tournaments.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 19:49
|
|
|
Someone in an Armada Facebook group pointed out that the modification header on upgrade cards has an actual purpose. Hidden in the rules is a bullet point that a ship can only have a single modification card. I never noticed that point before. I don't think it mattered before Wave 2, but with more upgrades, and different combinations of slots on ships, it is going to start mattering.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 19:57
|
|
|
Prior to wave two the only ship that could even equip two modifications was the Vic1, with Enhanced Armaments, and Expanded Launchers, and because that was just eating paint chips dumb, everyone forgot about that rule.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 20:19
|
|
|
I think the main problem with fighers vs capitals is that they made the maneuver tool too big and assigned too many red dice to capitals. With it as it stands, and the ranges set the way they are, it is unlikely you'll be able to skirt an enemy formation and avoid getting shot at altogether. You might be able to avoid black dice, and maybe even blues, but probably not reds, and red dice are very common. If *most* of your meaningful firepower had to be in fighter-form, because that was the only thing maneuverable enough to chase down lighter hulls, and also intercept enemy bombers, then fighters vs capital ships would be more meaningful as a choice. As it stands, Xwing has an advantage, not just with arcs (in as much as there are arcs that matter when someone isn't just running turreted stuff) but also that board size + ship maneuverability + ship range is balanced around being able to 'get away' with the right moves. In Armada, if a ship with plenty of red dice wanders into the middle of the board, you're likely to never get out of its firing range, unless it's going too fast and can't slow down in time. The only way to really get out of range is when two sets of very fast ships 'joust' past each other. And by that time, what's the point? I guess in the current situation, fighters are kind of like mines. If you run your fast ships past the enemy, then at least the fighters can stay behind and keep firing to finish off whoever was weakest. Which just reinforces the point made above, because if you didn't win the initial engagement, what makes you think throwing 3-4 dice at someone on the next turn, even if you can pick the hull quadrant, is going to be better than doing the same thing on the two previous turns as you flew by? I think scenario play could save it. Or even, god help me, force org restrictions. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 20:28
|
|
|
TheCosmicMuffet posted:I think scenario play could save it. Or even, god help me, force org restrictions. Armada 2nd Edition Core Set - "You must spend at least 1/3 of your fleet points on squadrons"
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 20:35
|
|
|
TheCosmicMuffet posted:I think the main problem with fighers vs capitals is that they made the maneuver tool too big and assigned too many red dice to capitals. I like to think of fighters as stationary defensive turrets that can move a bit if they don't have active targets. It helps with the cognitive dissonance of the things being named as the fastest most maneuverable things being instead the most static in the game. Also starting to think some force org structure may become necessary, lest something like the naked Motti plus five Victories start to become mainstays.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 20:43
|
|
|
I think the large base ships in Wave 2 will help to make squadrons more viable. As you put it, red dice are very common, but squadrons ignore those red dice. They can get close to that ISD with only a minor worry of a few blue dice being thrown their way. With proper placement, I would imagine that a squadron should get a minimum of three turns of shooting at even a speed 3 ISD (first shot from max of range 1 in front of the ship, second round get bumped and placed directly in front of the ship, third round possibly get avoided, but shoot at the side or tail of the ship). When an ISD can potentially destroy a 50 to 80 point ship in a single round, those same dice coming in the form of squadrons will likely have a larger effect. In the end, I think it will come down to a bit of a rock paper scissors effect. A fleet with no squadrons will do well against a fleet with a handful of interceptors. A fleet with a handful of interceptors will do well against a heavy squadron list. And a squadron heavy list will do well against a fleet with no squadrons. I think the other reason squadrons were not used in Wave 1 is that it weakened the points spent on your admiral. With anywhere from 7 to 13% of your points tied up in an admiral that only helped your ships, taking less ships reduced the value of those points spent. The wave 2 trend of having expensive and powerful admirals or cheap and useless admirals is not going to help things much.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 20:56
|
|
|
I took advantage of the meta in Armada during the Sullust event, and used four squadrons of b-wings to great effect. If someone wants to run a fleet with no fighters against my b-wing/gallant haven, they're gonna have some serious problems either closing in on my ships or knocking me off objectives. Edit: FURTHERMORE I like the variety of objectives, although of course some are rarely ever seen, and there are ones you definitely don't want to pick against certain lists. It would be cool to see more objectives released in the future for added variety. I find myself bidding low enough to choose whether or not I want the initiative (8 points seems to be the magic number) most of the time. I've tended to go first against opponents with more ships, and go second against someone when I think I might have an objective advantage. I very much enjoy playing to objectives, more nuanced maneuvering, and so on. And Armada's just getting better with wave two. Reynold fucked around with this message at 01:46 on Oct 13, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 23:32
|
|
|
I also hope that they bring more of them in. Fleet Ambush in particular seems particularly bad: it's easy to circumvent and all the times I've used it, it didn't give me enough of an advantage to make it worth using it. Intel Sweep doesn't seem great either. Advanced Gunnery is pretty good for Imperials and I always include it but good luck getting someone to pick it for you.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2015 12:47
|
|
|
The fact that fighters can't shoot and move leaves them in a pretty bad space, unless you commit a ship to Squadron commanding them. Which runs into issues when it gets to far away. Plus, since you auto lose if your capital ships all die, it's risky to run many fighters. See also: the Rogue keyword in wave two as an attempt to make fighters relevant. I'm not sure it's going to matter that much, since the named ships, while strong, are very expensive. No matter how good a couple of those are, is going to be hard to pick two squadrons over a corvette or a raider. I do think the absolute lack of Imperial ship options contributed to this, though. I don't know what idiot decided that 2 ships was enough for them in wave one, but it was a bad call, both for variety and balance, and for attracting players to the game. Add to that that the Victory had serious issues with its lack of speed and turning, and you end up with the gladiator spam situation that's been going around for months. Meanwhile the Rebels had cheap gunship corvettes and the excellent space manatee, and even the Neb was pretty decent if you could keep it from getting rushed down.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2015 14:27
|
|
|
The Gate posted:The fact that fighters can't shoot and move leaves them in a pretty bad space, unless you commit a ship to Squadron commanding them. Which runs into issues when it gets to far away. Plus, since you auto lose if your capital ships all die, it's risky to run many fighters. See also: the Rogue keyword in wave two as an attempt to make fighters relevant. I'm not sure it's going to matter that much, since the named ships, while strong, are very expensive. I feel that Fett in particular might change this(maybe Bossk as well). Fett should be able to go after both bigger and smaller ships and do plenty of damage with his ability + rogue/bomber. If you have no fighters it's going to take a long time to shoot him down. Maybe 100/133p fighters won't be popular, but I can definitely see lists going for a smaller escort of fighters more often than we see now.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2015 17:21
|
|
|
Squadrons take more planning when you're not devoting command dials to them, yes. This should come as a surprise to no one. Positioning your bombers for area denial or screening against opposing ships, as well as countering enemy fighters with your own is something that takes practice, something many players seem like they want to ignore. I don't think that attitude is going to survive long once wave two is released and the options for squadron support increase. Again, from my own personal experience, even just a couple of y-wings hanging out next to one of your ships, without dials to support them, will either influence your opponents' maneuvering decisions or tick a shield or two off of one of their hull zones, and the effect a handful of squadrons can have if unopposed can be quite significant over the length of the game, let alone what you can accomplish with a directed strike.
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2015 18:52
|
|
|
I sure hope those alt-art Tarkins go for a reasonable amount on eBay...
|
|
#
?
Oct 13, 2015 19:54
|
|
|
Grey Hunter posted:
We should do something about this. I think the current state of play in Armada is down to launch/wave 1 being a fairly limited release and wave 2 taking ages to come out despite being teased extensively since forever. The game feels far more limited than x-wing and definitive conclusions are being drawn prematurely. Because that is what people have to go on. The game needs its iconic capital ships and famous faces. Having more options will shake up the meta certainly and might just help to define the role of fighters so that the big picture begins to make more sense and close down the more cheesy tournament lists. Or not. Only one way to find out!
|
|
#
?
Oct 14, 2015 17:23
|
|
|
Grey Hunter posted:Ask and you shall receive. I just did my first set of TIE fighters...was there a certain grey you used to tone up any mistakes you made, or did you just say "...eh, gently caress it" if you brushed somewhere you shouldn't have? No reason that I'd be asking that, none at all 
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2015 05:54
|
|
|
Icon Of Sin posted:I just did my first set of TIE fighters...was there a certain grey you used to tone up any mistakes you made, or did you just say "...eh, gently caress it" if you brushed somewhere you shouldn't have? No reason that I'd be asking that, none at all I ran my fingers over any high points while it was still wet. The good thing about the scale is those photos are 2x scale, so you don't notice dodgy painting so much.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2015 09:32
|
|
|
They look really good. I've found painting the rebels to be fun and interesting, painting endless tie panels to be the most boring thing in existence. If you're ever down in London, I'll give you a game!
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2015 11:07
|
|
|
lenoon posted:They look really good. I've found painting the rebels to be fun and interesting, painting endless tie panels to be the most boring thing in existence.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2015 11:09
|
|
|
Yeah totally - are you in the Facebook group? I'll check with the wife but I should be free most nights next week. I must warn you that I am still terrible at this game, though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2015 12:02
|
|
|
lenoon posted:Yeah totally - are you in the Facebook group? I'll check with the wife but I should be free most nights next week. I must warn you that I am still terrible at this game, though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2015 12:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 23:20 |
|
|
Wait I can't do Tuesday, another day maybe, Thursday would work for me.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2015 13:37
|
|