back up now

Edit, still having some issues it seems - just getting one section of video on loop

Back down again.

Having power issues so show will have to end, post your questions below to get them answered next time

Thanks for the info! I'll reiterate my previous question: what upgrades come in the core set? And to add to that, what are the different type of upgrade slots called (eg Missile, Ion Cannon, etc)?

Hi guys. I'm happy to see that so many had the time and chance to follow my impromptu session. Next session will be better prepared and more structured, I promise.

Write questions in here and I'll do my best to answer them in due time.

See ya, must do it again.

Keep calm and carry on. Also: Fly Casual

Sorry to have missed it!! Can you elaborate on the damage cards a bit more?

Sorry to have missed it!! Can you elaborate on the damage cards a bit more?

Let's just say that they over all suck big time and might very well have a detrimental effect in a game

Yes... the few posted seemed like they could be quite troublesome. I like the idea anyway, adds a cool unknown factor.

Please post you playing the Learn to play on YouTube!

maybe he lost internet connection?

back up now

Edit, still having some issues it seems - just getting one section of video on loop

Back down again.

Please post you playing the Learn to play on YouTube!

Our LtP time lapse is on YouTube here:

I know the x-wings chewed through your TIE fighters in that battle. Would you say they are no match for an x-wing, or did you have bad luck in the dice roles? Or perhaps another factor? I'm thinking the lack of speed and maneuverability for the Victory could put it at a huge disadvantage in most games against faster rebel ships. If I was playing rebs I would always be trying to get into the rear firing arch for both the lower shields and lack of firepower. Seems like it could be quite a challenge to avoid that from happening in most games as an imperial player.

I know the x-wings chewed through your TIE fighters in that battle. Would you say they are no match for an x-wing, or did you have bad luck in the dice roles? Or perhaps another factor? I'm thinking the lack of speed and maneuverability for the Victory could put it at a huge disadvantage in most games against faster rebel ships. If I was playing rebs I would always be trying to get into the rear firing arch for both the lower shields and lack of firepower. Seems like it could be quite a challenge to avoid that from happening in most games as an imperial player.

I also think this is probably true for the imperials when you ONLY have the 1 core set VSD. In full games with 2+ caps i think it wont be as big of a deal since good imperial strategies should maneuver their ships so that avoiding a front arc of a VSD would put u in the front arc of a different VSD or multiple arcs of a gladiator or something.

At least in theory thats how I see imperials playing to try to make up for their lack of overall speed and maneuverability

Yes I was thinking the same thing. With 2 or 3 capital ships to cover firing arcs and prevent flanking it would certainly balance things out... good thing I purchased 2 core set! lol

This is awesome!

Thank you for sharing this with us Forensicus.

The immediate thing that lept out at me was..."Damned, that VSD looks BIG!"

Hehe.

I know the x-wings chewed through your TIE fighters in that battle. Would you say they are no match for an x-wing, or did you have bad luck in the dice roles? Or perhaps another factor? I'm thinking the lack of speed and maneuverability for the Victory could put it at a huge disadvantage in most games against faster rebel ships. If I was playing rebs I would always be trying to get into the rear firing arch for both the lower shields and lack of firepower. Seems like it could be quite a challenge to avoid that from happening in most games as an imperial player.

I think he said the neb b did an anti starfighter attack... Which mathematically took off one hp from each tie. Combined with the xwing attack(4 blue =2 hp.) the ties were doomed.

After reviewing the Time Lapse footage, it seems that Forensicus might have been better off pulling his TIEs back on the round/turn at 0:36 -pulling them back behind his VSD while still keeping them within range 1 of the X-Wings.

Is that even possible?

I suppose, when we look at Starfighters, we think that their task is to screen the big ships...but I think there's certainly nothing wrong with using your capital ships, to screen your starfighters if there is a very significant risk of your starfighters being annihilated by combined fire.

Feel free to jump in and correct me if I'm wrong.

Actually one question we did have that noone has been able to answer definitively yet, is:

If you have squadrons that are engaged with other fighters - say they you engaged them with some fighters that moved and shot with a squadron command. Can a capital ship (maybe your second ship that hasnt activated yet) still shoot at them, and if so, are there any consequences or restrictions? (like a risk of damaging your own ships, in the enagement, or loss of accuracy as they might be harder to hit in a dogfight?

Would be really interesting to get an answer as it could have a huge impact on tactics.

If there is a restriction or penalty to shooting at engaged squadrons, then interceptors become even more valuable as it could leave anti-fighter ships sitting there unable to fully contribute. If there isnt, then anti-fighter capital ship support could be a very important part of the gameplay for fleets with fighters or bombers.

That is my question as well. If I can fire into the dogfight without risk my Corvettes just got a new job.

I'll let Forensicus have the last word, but I can't imagine any reason to assume there is any prohibition on firing on engaged fighters. The previews so far have given no indication of it, and FFG is designing a streamlined game here, with an emphasis on not having corner cases. I guess a lot of people here are coming from much more complex miniatures games with much more simulationist rules? I can understand why one could conceive of such rules, but not why you would assume they would exist without any mention of them.

I'll let Forensicus have the last word, but I can't imagine any reason to assume there is any prohibition on firing on engaged fighters. The previews so far have given no indication of it, and FFG is designing a streamlined game here, with an emphasis on not having corner cases. I guess a lot of people here are coming from much more complex miniatures games with much more simulationist rules? I can understand why one could conceive of such rules, but not why you would assume they would exist without any mention of them.

In the VT-49 Decimator pack in X-Wing the "fluff" scenario has the commander firing on rebel fighters even with their own tie fighters in the way.

This links to an upgrade card in the expansion where you must deal damage to another ship close to the target to simulate the risk of hitting several fighters in a dogfight - but potentially creating allied casualties.

So basically, I ask because there is already a precident of that idea by FFG in X-Wing, so seeing something similar in Armada is not out of the question?

I didn't know that; it seems like a cool idea for a similar upgrade in Armada. Perhaps a crew upgrade with similar effect? But I feel the fact that FFG included it in X-Wing as a component rather than a rule reinforces the idea that it isn't in Armada as a rule. Anyhow, I'll let Forensius tell us.

Good question. I would guess that firing into a dogfight results in either an obstruction to your dice, or a chance of damaging your own. Maybe a choice between the two? Rebs and Imps would probably make different choices if they could!

I would be suprised if thier is any restrictions.

I thought it said in the team Covenant demo that the shot was obstructed if your fighters were there, but I would have to watch the video again to be sure.

Edit: Watched it again, and the shots against engaged fighters were not considered obstructed, at least during the demo.