To the OP

Pg. 8 of the rules reference PDF under Overlapping 3rd bullet point.

If a ship must execute a maneuver at a reduced speed

due to overlapping another ship, it is allowed to overlap

the maneuver tool in its final position.

Being able to put the tool on the right side of the ship and click it to the left can give a shorter deeper angle that may allow for a ship to avoid collision on further turns.

It sounds like you're saying you think you can swap the maneuver tool over to the other side of the ship in order to avoid a collision, which isn't the case. If you end up colliding, you back your ship along the tool disregarding the tool overlap rules, but you don't get to switch the tool to the other side or change your clicks at that point.

Also, you're able to put the tool on the right and click it to the left in plenty of situations even if there's no collision involved. All that matters is whether or not your final position will make you overlap the tool.

Well, a friend of mine came up with the idea, that the smaller ship (perhaps even hullpoint-wise) takes the damage cart open as a critical damage and the larger craft takes it normal. This should discourage still usefull smaller crafts from ramming while a doomed craft can still do the kamikaze.

Well, a friend of mine came up with the idea, that the smaller ship (perhaps even hullpoint-wise) takes the damage cart open as a critical damage and the larger craft takes it normal. This should discourage still usefull smaller crafts from ramming while a doomed craft can still do the kamikaze.

I like that. Would discourage a "swarm" of corvette made to win by ramming. Because let's face it, when 400 pts will be the norm, I fear we see fleet of 8 corvertte with the sole purpose is to ram into ships to destroy them.

Well, a friend of mine came up with the idea, that the smaller ship (perhaps even hullpoint-wise) takes the damage cart open as a critical damage and the larger craft takes it normal. This should discourage still usefull smaller crafts from ramming while a doomed craft can still do the kamikaze.

I like that. Would discourage a "swarm" of corvette made to win by ramming. Because let's face it, when 400 pts will be the norm, I fear we see fleet of 8 corvertte with the sole purpose is to ram into ships to destroy them.

Sounds like a Swarm of 8 Corvettes that will go down in a giant turkey shoot against most fleets.

Edit: Also: Why just 8, when you could fit 9 in?

With their speed 4, they can be out of firing range and then BAM, they all get 1 dmg each but you just lost a VSD.

With their speed 4, they can be out of firing range and then BAM, they all get 1 dmg each but you just lost a VSD.

I would be very impressed if you managed to do that in one round. Just arranging eight of them around a single VSD without trying to do it with a maneuver and with no other ship in the area would be an impressive feat. Heck, I would be impressed if you managed four rams within the same round.

Also the VSD would activate in between, firing at a damaged corvette at short range. It would be lucky to survive.

Also you are now in short range of another 2 VSDs and their escorts and Bombers and are in complete disarray pointing all ways ...

I'm perhaps being a bit too 'fluffy-orientated' but when I'm playing I try to imagine what is 'really' going on. While ramming is a legititmate strategy rule-wise, I think some players ( almost certainly more in the casual camp rather than tourneys ) would find it odd that the crew of these ships could be so suicidal - especially if their ship isn't even damaged yet.

Taking the examples above ( for no particular reason ), a corvette ( basically the smallest ship ) has a crew of 30-165 based on Wookiepedia. Those many people would die barring escaping to do ( in itself ) minimal damage to, say, a VSD. Could you, as a general strategist, convince numberous captains/commanders of these ships to do so unless there was absolutely no other choice? This would be further compounded, I would surmise, by the rebels inherient lack of equipment and personnel - could they afford to use trained people and precious ships in any but the more dire situation? Looking back to the movies, it seems most collisions were based on loss of control ( such as the A-Wing that slammed into the bridge of the SD ) rather then as intented attacks.

There are a few instances I can see it happening: the dying ship's crew goes out in a blaze of glory just before exploding, or you have a society that can inspire certain individuals to preform such deeds ( such as the kamikaze pilots of WW II ), but these would be rarer occurances - not just appearing on your side of the battlefield and ramming straight into your enemy as a general strategy.

Anyways, as I said, this is strictly fluff-orientated, but I was just thinking outloud.

Another option would be to have damage based on the ship contacted.

Small Ships - 1 Damage

Medium Ships - 2 Damage

Large Ships - 3 Damage

2 Small ships hit each other, 1 damage each.

2 Large ships hit each other, 3 damage each.

As small ship hits a large ship, 3 damage for the small ship, 1 for the large ship.

I'm perhaps being a bit too 'fluffy-orientated' but when I'm playing I try to imagine what is 'really' going on. While ramming is a legititmate strategy rule-wise, I think some players ( almost certainly more in the casual camp rather than tourneys ) would find it odd that the crew of these ships could be so suicidal - especially if their ship isn't even damaged yet.

just wrote a post on this

what's "really" going on isn't necessarily ramming. you have to exercise the same flexibility of imagination as you do when squadrons start losing health but none of their effectiveness.

the ships could be executing strenuous maneuvers to avoid collision, overtaxing the engines, exchanging incredibly dangerously close fire, skimming the sides of one another, etc etc etc

Ultimately, the gameplay takes precedence over literally every other facet of the game, our imagination is just going to have to keep up

Another option would be to have damage based on the ship contacted.

Small Ships - 1 Damage

Medium Ships - 2 Damage

Large Ships - 3 Damage

2 Small ships hit each other, 1 damage each.

2 Large ships hit each other, 3 damage each.

As small ship hits a large ship, 3 damage for the small ship, 1 for the large ship.

this is awful from a game design perspective

you almost one shot corvettes!

With their speed 4, they can be out of firing range and then BAM, they all get 1 dmg each but you just lost a VSD.

I would be very impressed if you managed to do that in one round. Just arranging eight of them around a single VSD without trying to do it with a maneuver and with no other ship in the area would be an impressive feat. Heck, I would be impressed if you managed four rams within the same round.

Also the VSD would activate in between, firing at a damaged corvette at short range. It would be lucky to survive.

Also you are now in short range of another 2 VSDs and their escorts and Bombers and are in complete disarray pointing all ways ...

Hey! Don't kill my dreams of doing it!

I'm perhaps being a bit too 'fluffy-orientated' but when I'm playing I try to imagine what is 'really' going on. While ramming is a legititmate strategy rule-wise, I think some players ( almost certainly more in the casual camp rather than tourneys ) would find it odd that the crew of these ships could be so suicidal - especially if their ship isn't even damaged yet.

just wrote a post on this

what's "really" going on isn't necessarily ramming. you have to exercise the same flexibility of imagination as you do when squadrons start losing health but none of their effectiveness.

the ships could be executing strenuous maneuvers to avoid collision, overtaxing the engines, exchanging incredibly dangerously close fire, skimming the sides of one another, etc etc etc

Ultimately, the gameplay takes precedence over literally every other facet of the game, our imagination is just going to have to keep up

Another option would be to have damage based on the ship contacted.

Small Ships - 1 Damage

Medium Ships - 2 Damage

Large Ships - 3 Damage

2 Small ships hit each other, 1 damage each.

2 Large ships hit each other, 3 damage each.

As small ship hits a large ship, 3 damage for the small ship, 1 for the large ship.

this is awful from a game design perspective

you almost one shot corvettes!

Perhaps just having the smaller ship take 2 damage would be better. More streamlined. I'd also be tempted to say that rammed ships with evade tokens are allowed to use one to completely negate the ram.

I'm perhaps being a bit too 'fluffy-orientated' but when I'm playing I try to imagine what is 'really' going on. While ramming is a legititmate strategy rule-wise, I think some players ( almost certainly more in the casual camp rather than tourneys ) would find it odd that the crew of these ships could be so suicidal - especially if their ship isn't even damaged yet.

Taking the examples above ( for no particular reason ), a corvette ( basically the smallest ship ) has a crew of 30-165 based on Wookiepedia. Those many people would die barring escaping to do ( in itself ) minimal damage to, say, a VSD. Could you, as a general strategist, convince numberous captains/commanders of these ships to do so unless there was absolutely no other choice? This would be further compounded, I would surmise, by the rebels inherient lack of equipment and personnel - could they afford to use trained people and precious ships in any but the more dire situation? Looking back to the movies, it seems most collisions were based on loss of control ( such as the A-Wing that slammed into the bridge of the SD ) rather then as intented attacks.

There are a few instances I can see it happening: the dying ship's crew goes out in a blaze of glory just before exploding, or you have a society that can inspire certain individuals to preform such deeds ( such as the kamikaze pilots of WW II ), but these would be rarer occurances - not just appearing on your side of the battlefield and ramming straight into your enemy as a general strategy.

Anyways, as I said, this is strictly fluff-orientated, but I was just thinking outloud.

I liked Battlefleet Gothic in that regard, where every ship had a leadership value. I don't recall if you had to do this for ramming, but for most if not all special actions you'd have to roll 2D6 vs the leadership of the ship (usually between 6 and 9 depending on crew quality) potentially with modifiers to the dice. If you roll higher than the leadership value of the ship the crew essentially refuses to obey the order. The downside of course was a much more rule bloated game than Armada is, but I always liked the leadership thing.

... The downside of course was a much more rule bloated game than Armada is, but I always liked the leadership thing...

You are right. The question game designers look at is: Does the increase in complexity end up with a better experience for the players?

Ships taking damage for overlapping could be a very simple mechanic that is used to narratively to explain collisions or even boarding actions. I think that having it just nice and simple in this way you don't add to the time of play and that may be more important to FFG, Armada is already quite a lot longer than X-Wing and thus at tournaments takes 1-2 days of play.

With their speed 4, they can be out of firing range and then BAM, they all get 1 dmg each but you just lost a VSD.

I would be very impressed if you managed to do that in one round. Just arranging eight of them around a single VSD without trying to do it with a maneuver and with no other ship in the area would be an impressive feat. Heck, I would be impressed if you managed four rams within the same round.

Also the VSD would activate in between, firing at a damaged corvette at short range. It would be lucky to survive.

Also you are now in short range of another 2 VSDs and their escorts and Bombers and are in complete disarray pointing all ways ...

Hey! Don't kill my dreams of doing it!

Oh, sorry. Going by your previous statements I thought I was alleviating your fear of somebody else doing it.

Ramming doesn't bother me.

What bothers me is ramming while on a station!

It's hard to do, but if your target is lined up just outside of a station (cause they missed their attempt to overlap it) And you can ram them in such a way that your "reduced" maneuver lands you on the station. It's a free ram. Couple that with doing it again next turn if the victim (ISD usually) speed was not set high enough to clear the location, that is two possible free damage from ramming.

This actually happened in a game I was playing last week. I missed landing my isd on the station, and a corvete decided to just ram me for 2 turns, each time ending it's movement on the station.

That's the part of the game I don't like. The station. I man who the **** repairs BOTH sides when they are dukeing it out? The station should be something you can buy for points in your list to get the ability to repair at or something and if both sides take it, there need to be two different stations on the board.. Or just be an obstacle with no healing properties. The space station mechanic makes no sense.

That's the part of the game I don't like. The station. I man who the **** repairs BOTH sides when they are dukeing it out? The station should be something you can buy for points in your list to get the ability to repair at or something and if both sides take it, there need to be two different stations on the board.. Or just be an obstacle with no healing properties. The space station mechanic makes no sense.

makes perfect sense to me

the station is a third, neutral party

it'll cater to both sides; means more business

"speedy service and satisfaction guaranteed, even in the midst of heated battle!"

That's the part of the game I don't like. The station. I man who the **** repairs BOTH sides when they are dukeing it out? The station should be something you can buy for points in your list to get the ability to repair at or something and if both sides take it, there need to be two different stations on the board.. Or just be an obstacle with no healing properties. The space station mechanic makes no sense.

makes perfect sense to me

the station is a third, neutral party

it'll cater to both sides; means more business

"speedy service and satisfaction guaranteed, even in the midst of heated battle!"

Then it should be destructible. The imperials would not let a station survive that repaired a rebel ship. It's just not in their nature. Especially if that station was providing an ongoing tactical advantage that could be eliminated.

That's the part of the game I don't like. The station. I man who the **** repairs BOTH sides when they are dukeing it out? The station should be something you can buy for points in your list to get the ability to repair at or something and if both sides take it, there need to be two different stations on the board.. Or just be an obstacle with no healing properties. The space station mechanic makes no sense.

makes perfect sense to me

the station is a third, neutral party

it'll cater to both sides; means more business

"speedy service and satisfaction guaranteed, even in the midst of heated battle!"

Then it should be destructible. The imperials would not let a station survive that repaired a rebel ship. It's just not in their nature. Especially if that station was providing an ongoing tactical advantage that could be eliminated.

I'm sure it is destructible and that the imperials do destroy it

...but only after benefiting inordinately from its services

That's the part of the game I don't like. The station. I man who the **** repairs BOTH sides when they are dukeing it out? The station should be something you can buy for points in your list to get the ability to repair at or something and if both sides take it, there need to be two different stations on the board.. Or just be an obstacle with no healing properties. The space station mechanic makes no sense.

makes perfect sense to me

the station is a third, neutral party

it'll cater to both sides; means more business

"speedy service and satisfaction guaranteed, even in the midst of heated battle!"

Then it should be destructible. The imperials would not let a station survive that repaired a rebel ship. It's just not in their nature. Especially if that station was providing an ongoing tactical advantage that could be eliminated.

I'm sure it is destructible and that the imperials do destroy it

...but only after benefiting inordinately from its services

This man knows how to get the most out of our slaves citizens.

Firefly. Wait no! Wash gets a spaceship to the chest.

Weren't there Reaver ships ramming Alliance ships during Serenity's big space battle, which is the only actual ship to ship battle I remember seeing in the franchise? I know they were in the novelization but I thought they were doing so in the movie as well.

I am still confused how you get in a situation to ram several times. You do not reduce the dial speed in a ram and you only collide if you overlap final positions, so the turn after a collision one of the ships should just fly "through" (around, above\below, whatever) the other.

I am still confused how you get in a situation to ram several times. You do not reduce the dial speed in a ram and you only collide if you overlap final positions, so the turn after a collision one of the ships should just fly "through" (around, above\below, whatever) the other.