Apologies. I appear to have cracked open a sore topic.

But I think the gist is this: while an SSD could be made for the game, it would be better -- by far -- if it wasn't. Which is kind of where I was headed with the thought...

I really like Yoink101's take on this. Since the model is impractical, the entire table is the SSD (or part of one). The Rebs have to take out a target on the ships' surface, the Imps are trying to stop them. Maybe we set up some map features like massive shield generator spheres or weapons turrets. These could act both as targets and as obstacles.

I actually like Yoink101's idea as well. It best reflects the reality.

Dont know if any of you folks have played it, but the Sins of A Galactic Empire mod does an excellent job representing an Executor class SSD. That thing could take on entire fleets (Think 10+ Mon Cals and hundreds of support ships) and decimate them without even getting to 50% shields.

Seriously, bringing an Executor class SSD would be like bringing a completed Death Star II to Armada. It is just too powerful.

I agree with a few comments made here.

I beleive you will be able to field 2 ISDs in a standard game. just.

Just like you can squeeze in 3 Vic-I's and a commander, and thats it, I believe that you will be able to fit in 2 ISD-I's and a cheap commander, and thats it. the ISD-II will be costed just expensive enough to make it impossible to do the same with it.

But your ships will have no fighter support to go against the inevitable rebel swarm comign against you. Trench-Run-Desease anyone?

Mon Cals will be a different story depending on the varient used, as the standard MC-80s couldn't stand up against a ISD, but could easily dominate them by employing their embarked fighters

I would also like to point out that the rebels may be able to use a more slugging fest style list with the assault frigates. This is just speculation until abit more is known about it, but I'd hazard a guess that it can at the least duke it out with vsd's. It looks like it's going to have very solid firepower on the broadsides, and can lay down alot of hurt as the middle ship. It probably won't win 1v1, but should be able to move better, and take stronger range 3 shots if there's an angle. (so broadside and front arc).

I'd then expect the mc80's to be similar, not quite as strong as an isd, but perhaps more agile and with a similar broadside focus as the af2.

In most sources I've seen the MC80s have had identical firepower in every arc.

In Solo Command, Home one "crossed the T" of Iron Fist, and could actually bring more firepower from her broadside to bear than the SSDs bow weaponry. That being said, Home One was far more powerful than a standard MC-80

In Solo Command, Home one "crossed the T" of Iron Fist, and could actually bring more firepower from her broadside to bear than the SSDs bow weaponry. That being said, Home One was far more powerful than a standard MC-80

Wasnt that Mon Remonda? Which is an even MORE powerful MC80b, a whole different hull. That thing was something of a monster actually.

I actually like Yoink101's idea as well. It best reflects the reality.

Dont know if any of you folks have played it, but the Sins of A Galactic Empire mod does an excellent job representing an Executor class SSD. That thing could take on entire fleets (Think 10+ Mon Cals and hundreds of support ships) and decimate them without even getting to 50% shields.

Seriously, bringing an Executor class SSD would be like bringing a completed Death Star II to Armada. It is just too powerful.

Didn't consider needing it before but now that you mention it maybe we do need two mega huge expansions for the DS and DS2.

In most sources I've seen the MC80s have had identical firepower in every arc.

I don't know alot about the specifics of each ship, and whatnot, but for faction identity I think making the rebel heavys broadside ships, while the imperial triangles are firing from the front mostly would seem like a nice way to differentiate the ships. Plus if the mc80s had the same dice its front and side arcs it wouldn't be that tactically engaging, as your gonna get hit with full firepower each time.

In most sources I've seen the MC80s have had identical firepower in every arc.

I don't know alot about the specifics of each ship, and whatnot, but for faction identity I think making the rebel heavys broadside ships, while the imperial triangles are firing from the front mostly would seem like a nice way to differentiate the ships. Plus if the mc80s had the same dice its front and side arcs it wouldn't be that tactically engaging, as your gonna get hit with full firepower each time.

I agree...FFG are quite happy to change things to suit gameplay, which is as it should be. Otherwise MC80's would be "turrets in space", and everyone just LOVES those everywhere in X-Wing......

I could definitely see them being broadside style ships. The Assault Frigate Mk2 is already iirc (though cant see the card right this second).

The introduction of large base ships will then lead to questions about epic ships

The imperials would of course get the super star destroyer ala episode VII

The rebellion would get something even bigger: rebel tears

I can see FFG doing something to make a ship that could represent a huge ship just to fit scale like they did with the Raider for X-wing. And im sure they would do the same for the Rebel faction. And they would design it to be pleasing to look at enough that no one will care if it is something that was originally from Star Wars Or not

But I think the gist is this: while an SSD could be made for the game, it would be better -- by far -- if it wasn't.

The issue with the SSD is the same exact problem with a ISD in X-Wing. The same arguments can be used with only changing a I into a S. The issues of size and capabilities are just too great to overcome in both cases.

I fully expect FFG to enact a rule for Armada like they have with X-Wing, a design rule that says nothing over X Meters long. With X-Wing that is about 150m, with Armada I expect it to be about 2km.

But I think the gist is this: while an SSD could be made for the game, it would be better -- by far -- if it wasn't.

The issue with the SSD is the same exact problem with a ISD in X-Wing. The same arguments can be used with only changing a I into a S. The issues of size and capabilities are just too great to overcome in both cases.I fully expect FFG to enact a rule for Armada like they have with X-Wing, a design rule that says nothing over X Meters long. With X-Wing that is about 150m, with Armada I expect it to be about 2km.

I just don't see any potential in the game getting any larger (space wise) than it is, unless it explodes like x-wing did.

Not to escalate to the point of absurdity, but I would like to see the death star so we could get some return of the jedi style battles going on

Of course, the small moon would still probably be the size of the table, but a nice objective marker (that ships could go over like a placement) representing it looming in the distance.

I agree with a few comments made here.

I beleive you will be able to field 2 ISDs in a standard game. just.

Just like you can squeeze in 3 Vic-I's and a commander, and thats it, I believe that you will be able to fit in 2 ISD-I's and a cheap commander, and thats it. the ISD-II will be costed just expensive enough to make it impossible to do the same with it.

But your ships will have no fighter support to go against the inevitable rebel swarm comign against you. Trench-Run-Desease anyone?

Mon Cals will be a different story depending on the varient used, as the standard MC-80s couldn't stand up against a ISD, but could easily dominate them by employing their embarked fighters

Maybe two ISDs.

But look at the Corvette at 44 points. In a 300 point match, you can field 6 of them with a Commander. A Victory can nearly one-shot a Corvette alone with its 6 forward facing attack dice. I imagine at the very least an ISD will have 8 forward attack dice. 6 Corvettes against 2 ISDs doesn't seem like a fair fight at all.

I agree with a few comments made here.

I beleive you will be able to field 2 ISDs in a standard game. just.

Just like you can squeeze in 3 Vic-I's and a commander, and thats it, I believe that you will be able to fit in 2 ISD-I's and a cheap commander, and thats it. the ISD-II will be costed just expensive enough to make it impossible to do the same with it.

But your ships will have no fighter support to go against the inevitable rebel swarm comign against you. Trench-Run-Desease anyone?

Mon Cals will be a different story depending on the varient used, as the standard MC-80s couldn't stand up against a ISD, but could easily dominate them by employing their embarked fighters

Maybe two ISDs.

But look at the Corvette at 44 points. In a 300 point match, you can field 6 of them with a Commander. A Victory can nearly one-shot a Corvette alone with its 6 forward facing attack dice. I imagine at the very least an ISD will have 8 forward attack dice. 6 Corvettes against 2 ISDs doesn't seem like a fair fight at all.

That's because Corvette's aren't meant to make up the 'meat' of a Rebel armada. Squadrons are. Or Assault Frigates. Rebels look like they do better with variety, using synergy.

Have 2 Corvettes near the center of the battle line, they can anti squadron fire out of 2 side arcs each and each severely wound or outright kill some 3hp TIE/Lns. Then the B-Wings and X-Wings swoop in and start pecking out the SDs while the Rebel capital ships try and maintain long range (or further).

Imps are better at slugging matches (The assault frigate looks promising, but I suspect it isn't a match for a VSD), while the rebels do well using maneuvers and 'range' dodging. Every Rebel ship has an Evade token, that alone tells you where Rebels want to be. Imps have lots of Halve Damage tokens, best for use at close range where maximum weapons can be brought to bear.

Anyway, TL;DR: No list should be maxing out 1 class of ship, balance will be key in this game.

Anyway, TL;DR: No list should be maxing out 1 class of ship, balance will be key in this game.

Well, it's not the case anymore for X-wing, so who knows how long that will last

Anyway, TL;DR: No list should be maxing out 1 class of ship, balance will be key in this game.

Well, it's not the case anymore for X-wing, so who knows how long that will last

Thats where the objective missions will really come in I think - just posted a preview of some more cards in the objectives thread that might make people think about how different builds of ships could be used best for each.

Anyway, TL;DR: No list should be maxing out 1 class of ship, balance will be key in this game.

Well, it's not the case anymore for X-wing, so who knows how long that will last

Thats where the objective missions will really come in I think - just posted a preview of some more cards in the objectives thread that might make people think about how different builds of ships could be used best for each.

I would certainly hope so

I am optimistic about objectives because I also play Warmachine (privateer press), which heavily stresses the use of specific scenarios in games. It's seen as an essential balancing factor because it forces different engagements and therefore more flexible armies that can afford to engage the enemy in a variety of different styles.

It also heavily discourages armies that just sit back with their thumbs up their butts, scoot back, and roll dice, so thank god for that (best analogy would be fat Han running the clock in a competitive match)

Hoping that Armada objectives have a similar impact. As much as I love the idea of spamming Destroyers and tie fighters, I would much rather have a game that encourages balance and variety than spam (cue the python)

Yeah, definitely want to field at least one ISD in my fleet.

No one's actually discussed possible RRP yet? What does everyone think?

Either way, the poor wallet's not going to get out of this unscathed.