This topic has been passed around quite a bit because I believe it's something a lot of us would like to see.

This might sound strange, but I would like to see a game based on Letters from Whitechaple. For those unfamiliar, this is a game where one player plays a criminal who must run from the other player who is trying to catch them.

This would be perfect for the Rebels playing the runners, and the Imperials trying to interdict them. At the start of each round the rebels choose a mission and the planet it starts on, complete it, and then make a run for thier safehaven. It can all be abstracted out so the game can be played alone, or include missions so that you can fight ground missions with Imperial Assault, Fighter Raids with X-Wing, of full fleet engagemants with Armada. It could have a full campaign built it so both sides get more powerful as the game goes on.

Instead of a board it could have tiles so that each game could be unique.

I really want to play this game.

Get working on it then.

The best writing advice I've ever gotten was write the story you can't find.

The same applies to games. Make the game you can't find.

I think descent had some sort of game that tied all of its expansions into a larger world.

I don't know if such a game would sell well tying all the Star Wars game together as the set up time alone for 1 battle for each set (xwing, imp assault and armada) would be atrocious!

I think descent had some sort of game that tied all of its expansions into a larger world.

I don't know if such a game would sell well tying all the Star Wars game together as the set up time alone for 1 battle for each set (xwing, imp assault and armada) would be atrocious!

We will find out. In September there is a gaming convention my group is going to. We are planning to do exactly this over the course of the weekend.

I think descent had some sort of game that tied all of its expansions into a larger world.

I don't know if such a game would sell well tying all the Star Wars game together as the set up time alone for 1 battle for each set (xwing, imp assault and armada) would be atrocious!

We will find out. In September there is a gaming convention my group is going to. We are planning to do exactly this over the course of the weekend.

Oh wow... Maybe you guys can get a couple larger tables, get the games out and semi set up so you can just move from game to game without a full put away and set up between each game on a single table.

Set up issues aside, should be really fun!

I think descent had some sort of game that tied all of its expansions into a larger world.

I don't know if such a game would sell well tying all the Star Wars game together as the set up time alone for 1 battle for each set (xwing, imp assault and armada) would be atrocious!

We will find out. In September there is a gaming convention my group is going to. We are planning to do exactly this over the course of the weekend.

Oh wow... Maybe you guys can get a couple larger tables, get the games out and semi set up so you can just move from game to game without a full put away and set up between each game on a single table.

Set up issues aside, should be really fun!

Thats something like what we are planning. We were going to get a vender table as a command post. Some game will be running simultaneously, such as RPG stuff. Im in charge of the Armada part, someone else for X-Wing and a third for IA. Basically, there will be a story line that each game influences. Armada will inflluence X-wing, but there may be a simultaneous IA game going on. For insttance, if rebel transport come base to base with an Imperial ship, that will trigger a boarding action played out in IA. Or at least, thats what we hope. We are still working out how we will do some of this, but part of the fun is the planning.

I'm quite impressed. I look forward to hearing how it all turns out

I don't know if I'd be into a strategic game that spanned various products -- I have no interest in purchasing X-Wing at this time, for example. But man, I would throw down on an Armada strategy game where the conflicts were resolved using Armada miniatures. At that point, we could introduce pitched battles where players end up with fleets of varying point strengths and scenario-based objectives. Perhaps a 100 pt Rebel garrison fleet must stall a larger 200 pt Imperial force, preventing any Medium based ship from reaching the opposing table edge. Or a pursuit where the ships are deployed with the attacker positioned already behind his target, with a field of obstacles between them and the table edge they have to reach by turn 6.

These sort of scenarios would be fun and thematic, but would not be acceptable in the terms of Armada as a equal-playing-field, competitive game. When you can balance unequal combats against the larger mechanics of a strategy game, however, you diminish the injustice of handicapping a player in any given single battle. This allows you to fight as an underdog and not feel cheated, or muster overwhelming power against a cowering foe without feeling like you're cheating. Box up a set of rules with a couple of factionless objective vessels like tankers and freighters to be used in the included scenarios, and sell it to me for $60 as a "Strategy Expansion".

Get working on it then.

The best writing advice I've ever gotten was write the story you can't find.

The same applies to games. Make the game you can't find.

Ugh, the effort button. Can't...reach...it...

Get working on it then.

The best writing advice I've ever gotten was write the story you can't find.

The same applies to games. Make the game you can't find.

Ugh, the effort button. Can't...reach...it...

I feel like the scale for each game is so drastically different that the sub-games would be insignificant. A whole skirmish team for Imperial Assault could be carried by a single large ship in X-Wing (heck, you could probably even fight a skirmish game inside some of them), and a whole X-Wing list is maybe equivalent to a single squadron in Armada.

I feel like the scale for each game is so drastically different that the sub-games would be insignificant. A whole skirmish team for Imperial Assault could be carried by a single large ship in X-Wing (heck, you could probably even fight a skirmish game inside some of them), and a whole X-Wing list is maybe equivalent to a single squadron in Armada.

Maybe even have One Capitol ship in an Epic X-Wing game.

You could make for some interesting stories that way.

But it sounds like a hassle and RPG's generally already have combat rules. Throwing it on the table is occasionally fun though.

Also that way you can throw it across sessions of gameplay rather than all at once.

You could always try using the FFG star wars rpg to try and tie them all in.

The RPG ties all together. Or the Force not too sure which.

Somewhat related to topic:

I'd kill a nest of Kittens if that would help in FFG getting the licence of 'epic 40K' (the rules/mechanics) and make a SW based version of it.

But that might be me.

For those unfamiliar; epic is among the best tabletop wargames ever made in a very small scale.

A tank in epic would roughly be the size of the hull (!) of a tie fighter in X-wing. So yes; you field lots of them.

Yes that means an 'epic' size wargame with LOADS of minatures.

Unfortunately no longer supported for whatever stupid reason.

one of the problems with tiing all those games together is the dependencies the customer would need. Taking a look at descnet, ffg never did big box expansions which assumed you have any other expansions. they only ever refer to the base game. i personaly think this is not necessary, expansions could be sequenls to eachother and labled like that but in this case i see the same problem just more severe.

ofc game elements could be made optional. the question is just up to which point. between not having IA and having it is one point but between having i.e. X-Wing and then also having the required ammount of specific models for that one mission is another.

ofc that kindof game would be nice but imo a lot of planning would have to go into the dependency tree and how to keep that scaleable to each individual players asssets.

Epic still is my favorite game from the GW side of things.

I know back when I first read the Star Wars Armada announcement, my first mental visions for this game was a combo of Star Wars, Epic and Battle Fleet Gothic.

Serious Grand Fleet Engagements like know other being the desired journey.

The problem with putting strategic and tactical layer together is, that one of both will get boring. If your tactical battle is a close match, you made a mistake on the strategic level. Strategy is about changing the odds on the tactical level in your favor.

What you could do, is changing between attack and defences scenarios depending on the strategic level while keeping the balance of the opposing forces tactically. Unfortunately, neither X-Wing nor the Armada objectives allow that.

A Battle of Endor multi-scale scenario was suggested over at the BGG forums: a Rebel commando squad tries to take down the shield generator on Endor. Depending on their success, the Armada game plays differently (e.g. some Imperial ships may or may not be diverted to protect the Death Star). And the outcome of the Armada game determines how many TIEs and X-Wings make it into the Death Star for the final attack run.

Hard to balance properly, to be sure, but certainly doable. And ****ing epic.

I think FFG SW RPG (too many acronyms!) is the thing that tie everything up. Instead to use the system in the RPG for battles, you use IA, X-Wing or Armada.

I don't know if I'd be into a strategic game that spanned various products -- I have no interest in purchasing X-Wing at this time, for example. But man, I would throw down on an Armada strategy game where the conflicts were resolved using Armada miniatures. At that point, we could introduce pitched battles where players end up with fleets of varying point strengths and scenario-based objectives. Perhaps a 100 pt Rebel garrison fleet must stall a larger 200 pt Imperial force, preventing any Medium based ship from reaching the opposing table edge. Or a pursuit where the ships are deployed with the attacker positioned already behind his target, with a field of obstacles between them and the table edge they have to reach by turn 6.

These sort of scenarios would be fun and thematic, but would not be acceptable in the terms of Armada as a equal-playing-field, competitive game. When you can balance unequal combats against the larger mechanics of a strategy game, however, you diminish the injustice of handicapping a player in any given single battle. This allows you to fight as an underdog and not feel cheated, or muster overwhelming power against a cowering foe without feeling like you're cheating. Box up a set of rules with a couple of factionless objective vessels like tankers and freighters to be used in the included scenarios, and sell it to me for $60 as a "Strategy Expansion".

This is more in line with what I'd like to see. If the strategic level aligned well enough with Armada (and at least a rudimentary system existed to tie in Armada and the RPG), I expect the inevitable efforts of others to link together Armada, X-Wing, and Imperial Assault would fill in the gaps.

I'm half-tempted to take a crack at this myself, but I'm not sure I'm well versed enough in the SW universe to do it justice.