I can't see Armada's table size and points restrictions being something that's set in stone, and strictly adhered to.

They will be by FFG.

FFG is not going to make anything that breaks the standard tournament format, so while someone may host a 600 or 900 point game on a 8x4 table and play with 3-4 ISD's per side. That is not something FFG is going to take into account when they design stuff.

In X-Wing they design stuff around a 100 point 6 asteroid death match. For epic they design stuff around a 3x6 table with 300 points per side. For Armada they're going to design the game around 300 point lists on a 3x6 table.

That means they'll make the ISD a size that works for the standard game, the model is too big for a 900 or 1200 point game on a 3x6 table is not an issue that's going to be considered.

Given the projected price for the game in New Zealand, I doubt it will see any competitive play here. It's just going to be too expensive, which is why I said I can't see the table size and points restrictions being adhered to. I think it's going to be a very casual game here. I recently attended a major gaming convention and for X-wing, they could only get 6 players. An X-wing core set costs $60-70 here and small ships $25-30. Armada is likely to cost around $160-180 just for the core set, so that's going to be a major factor in determining whether it's going to be a success or not.

There was a lot of excitement when it was first announced, but once the prices were announced, that excitement faded rapidly. The gaming community in New Zealand is still very small, and this game is going to be in an even smaller niche.

I'm skeptical about FFG's hopes for competitive play. I work at an FLGS and the kinds of tournaments we see going on are smaller, quicker events (card games; magic, SWLCG, X-Wing, Attack Wing, Chess, King of New York, Dice master). I haven't seen a Warhammer tournament, except league play, ever in our store and that's the closest comparison to my image of how Armada is going to run.

It would be nice to do but I don't know how possible it is. Two hours, three rounds, six hours for nearly an entire day without a break!

The gaming community in New Zealand is still very small, and this game is going to be in an even smaller niche.

That may very well be, and maybe it will be common for people there to play 1200 point games. But will not be the standard that FFG bases their design on.

I'm skeptical about FFG's hopes for competitive play.

Again, that may be true, but that also doesn't change anything. FFG has to design based on what ever they decide the standard game will be.

I would suspect that they won't be limiting themselves to a 300 point cap either. I think the vast majority of gamers that invest in Armada are going to want to play past the 300 points and FFG will realise that. With a VSD coming in at 75-85 pts before upgrades, you're not likely to get very many Imperial ships for the 300, and 3 ships barely makes it "fleet combat". It sounds a bit like the X-wing core set's suggestion of 60 point games to me.

And is there going to be the level of popularity to guarantee tournaments? I guess we'll have to wait and see.

I'm pretty sure (95%+) the Gencon videos said that 300 points WILL be the equivalent of the 100 X-Wing standard. It's definitely not like the core box 60pt suggestion.

Think about it....we see plenty of X-Wing lists with only 2-3 ships, so its not too surprising. And if you take 3 ships, thats 3 Star Destroyers....we aren't exactly talking 3 frigates or Corvettes here.

I'm not disputing the 300 point figure, but even X-wing expanded to 300 points for epic play. It wouldn't surprise me if Armada heads the same way.

I wouldn't consider 3 Star Destroyers to be a fleet by any means, that's merely a squadron. And even 300 points of CR90s is only 6 ships. Still not really a fleet.

New poster here. I am stoked for this game. As soon as X-Wing came out, my first thought was "when will we see the Capital ships? Now it's almost here. Now on to my main point.

I wouldn't consider 3 Star Destroyers to be a fleet by any means, that's merely a squadron. And even 300 points of CR90s is only 6 ships. Still not really a fleet.

I totally agree with this point. I see a fleet as an ISD, a couple VSDs, throw in a Decimator or two, some smaller ships, and then all the fighter/bomber escorts. I really hope they set the game up in a way that this is the norm and not the exception.

Are we serious? We know the capital ships are not to scale and now you want to bring in an ISD into the game? Does this even remotely present a serious challenge?

In the movies how many were taken out?

I love this site, but **** calm down on a game that has not been released yet.

Don't worry, be happy! Seriously, do that and nothing else I haven't seen a single argumentative/upset post here in quite some time and am rather enjoying that. This is just how some of us (im)patiently kill time waiting for the impending release of the game some of us have been waiting years for, I for one am actually enjoying all the back and forth. This subject in particular gives me something fun to read on my twice daily visits to this page. I don't know about anyone else here, but I'd much rather be excited about what's coming up than calm down

As a side note, is anyone else having trouble getting quotes to show up correctly? Could you PM me (so we don't take up space here) any steps to fix that if you're willing to help me figure it out?

Given the projected price for the game in New Zealand, I doubt it will see any competitive play here. It's just going to be too expensive, which is why I said I can't see the table size and points restrictions being adhered to. I think it's going to be a very casual game here. I recently attended a major gaming convention and for X-wing, they could only get 6 players. An X-wing core set costs $60-70 here and small ships $25-30. Armada is likely to cost around $160-180 just for the core set, so that's going to be a major factor in determining whether it's going to be a success or not.

There was a lot of excitement when it was first announced, but once the prices were announced, that excitement faded rapidly. The gaming community in New Zealand is still very small, and this game is going to be in an even smaller niche.

Hey Parravon,

Im from NZ too - up in Auckland though We have an NZ Armada facebook page if you are interested https://www.facebook.com/groups/511463642326452/

Personally I wouldnt be terribly disappointed if Armada didnt turn out to be a strong tournament game, as one of the biggest disappointments with X-Wing is how many of us players want to play huge games, but the mechanics being set for a 3x3 100 point game just don't translate well to larger games. With Armada starting at 3x6 that is more promising, but I cant say that I would be sad if it ended up not being a "official" tournament game if it resulted in a better experience for home gamer groups. Bit like Imperial Assault - I was looking at all my bits today setting up for a campaign group tomorrow and was thinking "Man, what a pain in the backside it would be to lug all of this to a tournament" i.e. all the map bits etc. (since you dont know what combination of map bits you need until you draw the mission card) Unless the tournament was providing the map bits - but that would mean having possibly several tournament box copies to use.

I dunno about excitement fading - im getting so impatient for it to come out! haha I have one mate who will likely also buy it, and 2-3 other mates who are keen to play it but not buy it themselves.

Also, I think its hilarious how the thread is titled "does it really need to be that massive" and its the only thread with a spam bot posting links to who knows what websites, lol.

He is saying that no, he disagrees with you - to him the massive scale is important

Right, but what I said was that physical size is less important than gameplay to me. So responding to that by saying "no," sounds like he's telling me I'm wrong about what's important to me. It was perplexing for a moment trying to figure out exactly what the "no" was supposed to be answering.

I figured out the gist of what he meant--the phrasing just threw me off.

I'm not disputing the 300 point figure, but even X-wing expanded to 300 points for epic play. It wouldn't surprise me if Armada heads the same way.

I wouldn't consider 3 Star Destroyers to be a fleet by any means, that's merely a squadron. And even 300 points of CR90s is only 6 ships. Still not really a fleet.

Yeah, which is one of the reasons I think "Star Wars: Armada" is a rather dubious title. "Star Wars: Captial Ship battles" is a slightly bad title (as is "Squadron battles"), but I think "Star Wars: Fleet Action" would be a better title... still not fleets, but it seems more generic.

New poster here. I am stoked for this game. As soon as X-Wing came out, my first thought was "when will we see the Capital ships? Now it's almost here. Now on to my main point.

I wouldn't consider 3 Star Destroyers to be a fleet by any means, that's merely a squadron. And even 300 points of CR90s is only 6 ships. Still not really a fleet.

I totally agree with this point. I see a fleet as an ISD, a couple VSDs, throw in a Decimator or two, some smaller ships, and then all the fighter/bomber escorts. I really hope they set the game up in a way that this is the norm and not the exception.

That isn't going to be the norm... quite clear from what we see so far. 3 Victory class Star Destroyers is the maximum big ships you can fit. This isn't going to be a fleet action game, it is essentially a squadron action game. Now, they may have an epic play format like x-wing that will accept this, but the standard format won't do this.

This is one of the reasons I will not get into this. Ok, I have too many other gaming commitments at the moment, and this would be an additional burden, but if the models are as large and the fleets are as small as they are it is also not quite the game I want. Now, I would still have got into it if I wasn't already keeping up with x-wing, netrunner, doomtown and Imperial Assault, or if the price point was lower, as I am sure it will be a fun game, but as it is it doesn't look close enough to knock any of the others of their perch.

The thing is the FFG do seem to have a certain type of game they build to. They want it to be relatively short (an hour or so), have really blingy models, and have a comparatively small number of units to play with (which kind of helps with the criteria, as less units means less time moving them). X-Wing fits in this, and as far as fitting the theme this is perfect, as Star Wars fighter battles do tend to be about a handful of ships against each other (yes they have big starfighter battles, but they are really backdrops to the main actuion with the characters). Also, I don't think I could really be bothered with a game with much more than half a dozen fighters on each side.

However, for ship battles I kind of want things a bit less detailed, with more ships... I certainly think they have gone the right level of battles for the mechanics they have chosen, but I want squadrons of vessels to combat each other, not one squadron aside. Currently it looks like it fills a very similar niche of game to x-wing... and frankly, if I want to play that kind of game, why not stick to the one I have already invested a couple of hundred quid in?

Personally feel a Battlefleet Gothic scale and complexity game would have been more the kind of game I was looking for. Also a similar size of models too (where only the really big ships are as large as the Victory is in this one).

Quite true. I've got a couple of Battlefleet Gothic fleets and they are fleets. Ten to twelve cruisers, a couple of dozen destroyers. A proper fleet. This is what I was hoping for with Armada given their initial promo fluff was "Rebel and Imperial fleets fight for the fate of the galaxy..."

But by the sheer size of the models (which still look awesome), they've removed the fleet aspect and created a somewhat smaller scale battle to what a lot of folks may have been expecting. And with a 300 point cap (which I think is going to get ignored by most keen gamers here in New Zealand, 'cos we like big, epic games here), they've reduced it from even a squadron battle to a few ships having a skirmish.

Star Trek Attack Wing tried to create a fleet battle game, but by using the flight path system, they created a dogfight for Federation and Klingon cruisers more than a fleet game.

To be true to a fleet style of combat, ships should be maneuvering in squadrons, not singularly. I'm just not sure Armada is going to deliver. FFG, please prove me wrong.

I don't think there's any question that this is a skirmish size game, and not a full blown fleet sized one.

A big list in a standard game will be 1 ISD, 1 VSD, 1-2 Frigate or Vette sized ship and fighter escorts. But it's been pretty clear that it would be that as soon as they let us know the 300 point limit and we got a idea of the point costs of the ships.

I can not wait for the weight of the battles and SKIRMISH play.... let the Flyting begin!

This isn't going to be a fleet action game, it is essentially a squadron action game. Now, they may have an epic play format like x-wing that will accept this, but the standard format won't do this.

However, for ship battles I kind of want things a bit less detailed, with more ships... I certainly think they have gone the right level of battles for the mechanics they have chosen, but I want squadrons of vessels to combat each other, not one squadron aside. Currently it looks like it fills a very similar niche of game to x-wing... and frankly, if I want to play that kind of game, why not stick to the one I have already invested a couple of hundred quid in?

The thing I really like about Armada is that it does recreate fairly well the style of Star Wars engagements, which for the most part were handfuls of capital ships - not massive fleets. Where the Armada part would come in though is when you add a campaign system and galactic map with management of your entire inventory of forces (only some of which would come into battle in any particular sector)

WHY have I not thought of this?!? I think this campaign idea needs a whole new thread, we absolutely must have a system for larger campaigns.

I'd much rather be excited about what's coming up than calm down

we absolutely must have a system for larger campaigns.

I tip my hat to you

WHY have I not thought of this?!? I think this campaign idea needs a whole new thread, we absolutely must have a system for larger campaigns.

Yeah, I already have some pretty epic ideas brewing

WHY have I not thought of this?!? I think this campaign idea needs a whole new thread, we absolutely must have a system for larger campaigns.

Yeah, I already have some pretty epic ideas brewing

Sweet! It really must totally favor the Imps. Unless Reb opponents can levitate dice using the Force -- and thus flip them to all Hits/Crits, Imps should win about 70 or 80 % of the time

Sweet! It really must totally favor the Imps. Unless Reb opponents can levitate dice using the Force -- and thus flip them to all Hits/Crits, Imps should win about 70 or 80 % of the time

Okay, slow down there. The Rebel in me would like the record to reflect that the Rebels should rarely be playing to eliminate an opposing fleet. It should be protecting or acquiring a singe asset like in the old X-wing PC game. You know, guard two CR90's while they exchange passengers, escort freighters to a jump point, or destroy a single ship within a fleet and then jump out. "hit and hype" raids.

I like that the objective system includes a nod to this but even that favors Imperials insofar as they are still fleet vs. fleet elimination attacks.

Somebody should replicate a campaign from X-wing anf TIE Fighter respectively for each side!

A campaign for this game sounds like a blast.

I don't think there's any question that this is a skirmish size game, and not a full blown fleet sized one.

A big list in a standard game will be 1 ISD, 1 VSD, 1-2 Frigate or Vette sized ship and fighter escorts. But it's been pretty clear that it would be that as soon as they let us know the 300 point limit and we got a idea of the point costs of the ships.

I want to point out that tactics of the star wars universe used relatively small task forces called "lines" for the battles and these lines were meant to work together but often worked independently, and frequently only consisted of 1 or 2 capital ships escorted by a few frigates and corvettes so the scale of fleets in armada actually isn't all that small "the Imperial Navy considered an Imperial-class StarDestroyer a line in itself. "

Wookipedia source article on the topic

Line of battle

Main article: Line of battle#Galactic Empire

The most basic unit in the Imperial Navy was a line of battle, or simply a line. The Imperial Starfleet shaped four to twenty starships into lines, depending on the type of line. Commanded by a captain of the line, the line was the most amorphous level of organization in the Starfleet. The Imperial Starfleet Order of Battle outlined seven types of lines: attack, heavy attack, reconnaissance, pursuit, skirmish, troop and bombard. Attack and heavy attack lines aggressively engaged enemy starships in combat, reconnaissance lines gathered intelligence of the disposition of enemy forces, pursuit lines chased and trapped retreating enemies, and skirmish lines harassed capital starships and engaged enemy picket lines. A troop line consisted of two Evakmar-Kuat Drive Yards Corps Transport vessels, two escort vessels, and frequently twoStrike-class cruisers. Its function was the deployment of Army units. A bombard (or torpedo) line typically consisted of two Torpedo Spheres.

In addition to the seven types of lines, the Imperial Navy considered an Imperial-class Star Destroyer a line in itself. While an Imperial-class Star Destroyer may have been able to act as an attack line and its complement of starfighters as a skirmish line, the decision to give commanders the option to field a heavy cruiser as a line unto itself was more political than tactical. After a naval staff study suggested a Star Destroyer was the field equivalent of the smallest of naval squadrons, the Admiralty decided that, as there were more lines than squadrons, designating the Star Destroyer as a line unit would get them more Star Destroyers. The Admiralty's thinking prevailed.