DiabloAzul just wondering how the cards are coming along?

The idea behind them is that they can intimidate their enemies and cause them to "panic", disrupting their planned commands and saved tokens. The CR90 is particularly good for ramming, as it can then prevent the opponent from repairing or concentrating fire to attack back. The Nebulon can snipe from a safe distance, and force enemies to either take extra damage or lose a command token.

Unfortunately Wookieepedia is rather recalcitrant on the subject, but shots from Rebels season 2 seem to back up the TCW estimate, as CR90s easily zoom by Arquitens CLs, which appear to be about twice as large as the corvettes. I'm more than willing to buy into your weaponry logic, but this ship just seems too light at Hull 4. I also recall being quoted at 450 meters length at one point, but haven't been able to run that source back down. It is certainly one of the lesser known ships of the new canon.

Anyway, fair enough: I suppose there's no harm in making a card under the assumption it's 300-400m long. Looks like Mel's miniature is somewhat shorter (but beefier) than a Neb-B, which would also put it in the Hull 5 ballpark. Later on, if more reliable data emerges, it can always be revised.

Watch this space

I do like them a lot.

Many Thanks

Michael

That seems awfully light. The Arquitens, if I recall correctly, is about twice the size of the Charger C70 corvettes you see it with in TCW, and those are roughly equivalent in size and ability to Armada's CR90s. I've always thought of the ship as a medium screening element, and something of a corvette killer. Similar to the Gladiator, but less emphasis on close quarters combat. Maybe something like this?

Hull 5

Command 2

Squadron 1

Engineering 2/maybe 3

Either Diablo's list or Evade/Redirect/Brace

Speed 3 with Neb clicks is perfect

AS: 1 Blue

Fore: 2 Shields, 2 Red, 1 Black

Side: 2 Shields, 1 Red, 2 Blue, 1 Black

Aft: 1 Shield, 2 Blue

Upgrades: Diablo's list

Same base as the Venator ought to work just fine as well.

My opinion on some stats for it

4 hull points

Shields

Front 2

Sides 2

Rear 2

Armament

Front 2 blue

Sides 2 red 1 blue

Rear 1 blue

AA 1 black

Officer, Turbolasers, defense retrofits, Support Team

Brace, Evade, Redirect

1 command

1 squadron

2 engineering

Speed

1 (1)

2 (1) (2)

3 (-) (1) (2)

That sounds about right, *if* it really is that small. I'd still give it some black dice and probably an ordnance upgrade though. Perhaps two versions (with and without missiles)? Wasn't an Arquitens referred to as a "Communications Ship" at some point?

Here's a first go, with hull 4 but upped shields and engineering to compensate:

If I change it to hull 5 (and command 2) at some point, I will drop engineering to 2 and rear shields to 1.

That sounds about right, *if* it really is that small. I'd still give it some black dice and probably an ordnance upgrade though. Perhaps two versions (with and without missiles)? Wasn't an Arquitens referred to as a "Communications Ship" at some point?

I am only going by the star wars clone wars show. It was shown with some consulars. Not side by side but enough to get a good idea.

There's a lot of things here that have firepower nearly that of a Victory Star Destroyer, are so many things really that powerful?

There's a lot of things here that have firepower nearly that of a Victory Star Destroyer, are so many things really that powerful?

It really depends. Some things (Venator, Dreadnaught, Assault Frigate) are, others really shouldn't be anywhere near. Unfortunately, the damage/firepower scale in Armada is massively compressed, so massive differences in armament only result in small differences in dice. Compare the CR90-A and the Nebulon-B, for instance. Or the Gladiator-II and the VSD-I. It also doesn't help that stats for ships on Wookieepedia and other sources are, at best, inconsistent.

For the most part, I try to err on the side of caution, and nerf dubiously statted ships in a number of ways, such as giving them unwieldy arcs or very poor maneuverability, or simply overcosting them. But it's not easy without a dedicated playtesting effort, which is beyond my means. So I very much appreciate feedback and constructive criticism

Argh. I'm really undecided. The Light Cruiser card at the moment feels horribly overpowered for such a small ship: Red-Red-Blue-Black is the same broadside as a Dreadnaught (!). But remove one red die from each side arc, and suddenly the Arquitens becomes worse than a CR90-A (slower, less maneuverable, less well-armed and barely more survivable). There's just so little room between ships! :/

Maybe hull 5 is the way to go after all:

The Cruiser version packs a lot less punch than a GSD (as it should), though the broadsides are still Dread-esque. The Communications version lacks missiles, but has a defensive upgrade slot and command 1, which is neat for a ship this size.

Yeah, I would say you can either have the hull of a Neb or the engineering value of a Neb. But not both.

For the first one maybe have a blue-black in the back instead of just a blue, so their is a black die on all facings. Not sure why that matters to me, but I felt like it needed it. XD Maybe then bump its points up by 1 or 2 so its a tad more expensive than a support neb?

Also, how do you make the cards? They look very nice!

Looking at the two versions hull 5 definitely seems the way to go. That much firepower out of the side of a ship with command 1 just seems a bit too much.

Also it's one of them sharp pointy types, why does it have stronger sides than front?

Also it's one of them sharp pointy types, why does it have stronger sides than front?

Turbolasers and missiles are mounted in the side on the hull. I think they would have arc issues hence the difference in firepower.

PewPewPew, its a pointy ship with a broadside armament. The Venator is similar. Thanks for doing the cards Diablo, I had not started on this one yet. Did you consider 1 blue, 1 red, 1 black on the sides to reflect its armament without going to overboard? It seems to have not much more in the way of guns then a CR90 from a cannon point of view. Compressed is the right word for sure.

PewPewPew, its a pointy ship with a broadside armament. The Venator is similar.

Did you consider 1 blue, 1 red, 1 black on the sides to reflect its armament without going to overboard? It seems to have not much more in the way of guns then a CR90 from a cannon point of view.

But remove one red die from each side arc, and suddenly the Arquitens becomes worse than a CR90-A (slower, less maneuverable, less well-armed and barely more survivable). There's just so little room between ships! :/

Based on the size Mel's 3d print, I feel we can slot this ship just under the Neb-B: better in a few respects (well, just one: broadside armament) but worse in most others (pretty much everything else).

PewPewPew, its a pointy ship with a broadside armament. The Venator is similar.

Indeed! Both ships have semi-fixed turbolaser cannons in their hull sides, and batteries of smaller guns in turret mounts around the superstructure. The hull-mounted cannons cannot possibly turn enough to point to the front or rear, only the turrets can shoot dead ahead or dead astern. The later VSD and ISD designs make much better use of the wedge-shaped hull by placing all main armament in turrets. It's analogous to the casemate-mounted armament of pre-dreadnought battleships being abandoned in favour of large and heavily armored axially-centred turrets in the early 20th century.

Did you consider 1 blue, 1 red, 1 black on the sides to reflect its armament without going to overboard? It seems to have not much more in the way of guns then a CR90 from a cannon point of view.

I did, even made (though didn't upload) a card. But...

But remove one red die from each side arc, and suddenly the Arquitens becomes worse than a CR90-A (slower, less maneuverable, less well-armed and barely more survivable). There's just so little room between ships! :/

Also, though I can't find a good source (isn't that always the problem?), I'm fairly certain the large, fixed TL cannons are meant to be more powerful than a CR90s small TL turrets.

Based on the size Mel's 3d print, I feel we can slot this ship just under the Neb-B: better in a few respects (well, just one: broadside armament) but worse in most others (pretty much everything else).

I agree completely, sloting this in between a CR90 and a NebB is perfect.

The Neb B-2 is undervalued or overpowered.

Throwing 8 dice a turn is jaw-dropping power for 64 points. The Gladiator II is similar, but MUCH less versatile (the B2 maintaining a bunch of power - 4 dice at long range, and 6 dice at medium). I know the Gladiator II has a bigger Anti-Squadron armament, but a red die has its own advantages. Having flown with and against them in TIE Fighter and X-Wing Alliance, I'll say they should lose a blue die all around, and maybe drop 4-5 points.

Not trying to sound too critical. Overall, I think everything else is great. Still wanna see a good Quasar-Fire and Imperial Escort Carrier.

The only other thing I would say is the Neutron Star is a bit overpowered. Not based on their point value, but just on the Star Wars Universe. They were outdated crap during the First Galactic Civil War. I'd scale them back to be worth around 40-45 points. They were slow and undergunned. They should feel that way. No more than a pair of dice (between red and blue) on any given arc, and just one black die for anti-squad. And they were a huge pain to maintain - Engineering of 3 is a bit high.

EDIT: Still missing the Carrack, too.

I am no authority on the matter but, I wanted to take a quick second to talk about making custom ships in general. I think we can agree that we all do not want to break the game with some over powered ship or combination of our own creation. As fans and gamers it is natural to want to try and balance a vessel as well as be true to its cannon. In some regards, I think this may be a bit of a barrier that causes us to not always see outside of the box when trying new designs. Armada with its current provided material is not really working within that constraint as it is, so why should we? Anyway, I am thinking the focus of designs should be more on where and how does it fit into the parent fleets design meta, and what is its purpose within that frame work. Balance and playability may be easier to achieve in that regard.

With wave II on the way, many of our current ships will have the option to change again, and we should revisit them at that time. Anyway, a random 2am ramble.

Diablo, I want to talk with you on the SSD build, and how to best represent such an iconic if not impractical ship on the game table.

The Neb B-2 is undervalued or overpowered.

Throwing 8 dice a turn is jaw-dropping power for 64 points. The Gladiator II is similar, but MUCH less versatile (the B2 maintaining a bunch of power - 4 dice at long range, and 6 dice at medium). I know the Gladiator II has a bigger Anti-Squadron armament, but a red die has its own advantages. Having flown with and against them in TIE Fighter and X-Wing Alliance, I'll say they should lose a blue die all around, and maybe drop 4-5 points.

Not trying to sound too critical. Overall, I think everything else is great. Still wanna see a good Quasar-Fire and Imperial Escort Carrier.

The only other thing I would say is the Neutron Star is a bit overpowered. Not based on their point value, but just on the Star Wars Universe. They were outdated crap during the First Galactic Civil War. I'd scale them back to be worth around 40-45 points. They were slow and undergunned. They should feel that way. No more than a pair of dice (between red and blue) on any given arc, and just one black die for anti-squad. And they were a huge pain to maintain - Engineering of 3 is a bit high.

EDIT: Still missing the Carrack, too.

Thanks for the feedback! The B2 and the Neutron Star were among the first customs I made, so there's a good chance the stats are a bit out of whack. I've learned a lot in the process of making all of these, especially to take (inconsistent) Wookieepedia with a pinch of salt and let (inconsistent) canon take a backseat to gameplay. It's probably time I went back to some of the earlier cards and gave them an overhaul, or at least a critical look

EDIT: I think there's a Carrack in my Commissions folder . Someone else statted it and asked me to make a card for it. You can give it a look, maybe it works for you. Otherwise let me know, and I might make a revised version for my library proper.

Diablo, I want to talk with you on the SSD build, and how to best represent such an iconic if not impractical ship on the game table.

Lol, there wern't enough SSD threads already?

I was thinking double card, much like the epic ships in X-wing, fore and aft section with the ability to cripple the ship by destroying one side or the other. Practicallity on the table has been much of the concern in most threads, and that is one thing I can say with certainty that it will not be regardless of how we try.

We should also consider that its size/length and how it is based may be of concern when it comes to collisions during play. Do we just say non-epic ships that impact an epic ship are destroyed? Does it need a move diagram or do we just do speed 1, 1 Yaw? Can we assume it is so large and awkward that when it moves simply moved larger ships aside like squadrons? I was hoping the base Mel comes up with is tall enough that most ships simply fit under it.

I am also going to start taking photos of any models I have to replace card art. This is to avoid using any images that may cause concern.

I was wondering if any of you would be willing to work with me on creating cards for the CIS iconic ships. I have always wanted to do clone-war era battles with Venator-class / Acclamator ships against some of the CIS ships, such as the munificent-class frigates or the providence-class destroyer. I know Mel has a munificent-class on his shapeway page, I'm hoping he's working towards a provicence-class as well. Let me first say that I have no experience making custom ship designs, and I would appreciate all the help I can get. With that out of the way, this is some basic info I found regarding the ships from the wikia (I know you cant always go by wiki info, but I'm not sure where else to turn for info.)

Munificent class (825 meters) - probably 6-7 hull, between the gladiator (500m) and victory (900m)

-Weaponry: From pictures, it appears this ship has most of its heavy weaponry facing the front; (Prow heavy turbolaser cannon and 2x heavy ion cannons). The ship also has a complement of 26 twin turbolaser cannons and 20 light turbolaser turrets). Based off that info; I would probably give this ship 2x red / 2x blue in the front, and maybe 2x reds in the port and starboard arcs; probably 1x red in the aft.

-Shielding: 3/2/2/1 ?

-Maneuvering: I think the maneuverability should be similar to that of a B frigate or gladiator class, but I am not sure on this

-Command value: 2

-Squadron value: 1 or 2?

-Engineer value: 2

-Anti-squadron: 1 blue

points cost: I have no idea; Perhaps in the 60-ish point range.
As for upgrades, the munificent class did have designs for hangar bays. It could also have the usual turbolaser and ion cannon upgrades. I don't quite know what else to use.

Providence-class destroyer / carrier (1088 meters) 8 or 9 hull.

-Weaponry: (per wiki) 14 quad turbolaser cannons, 34 dual laser cannons, 2 heavy ion cannons, 12 point-defense ion cannons, 8 proton torpedo batteries. The issue is that I do not know how to assign the dice to each quadrant. I am pretty sure this ship had broadsides as its primary focus. It is also stated in the wiki that this ship could easily go toe-to-toe with victory and venator-class destoryers. My thoughts on the armament spread for a providence class is as follows: front (2x blue, 2x red), sides (2x black, 3x red), aft (1x red, 1x blue)

-Shielding; 2/3/3/1

-Maneuvering: perhaps similar to the victory maneuvering.

-Command: 3

-Squadron value: 3 (for destroyer variant) 4 for carrier variant)

-Engineering: 3 or 4?

-Anti-squadron 2x blue

The providence class was noted to be highly modular so it should have options for most upgrades.

-Points: high -70s to mid -80s ?

Please let me know what you think of these ideas. I would love feedback and want to tweak these stats. I can't wait to replay the battle over Coruscant with Venators, munificents, and Count Dooku's ship the Invisible Hand.

It's all good Isophane, this is all home-build work anyway. And I for one would very much like to see a CIS/GAR battle setup. As far as your ideas go, they seem solid. I am loathe to make the Munificent too strong, as it supposedly took several to safely engage a Venator , but in Armada's scale there is no question that they're both medium ships. One thing that would be interesting to work in, possibly as a title, is taking advantage of the ship's supposedly superior sensor and communications arrays. Something along the lines of the Katana title maybe? As far as the Providence goes, high 70's seems rather low for something packing that much punch. I would put that in the mid-80's and probably more. If it can carry most upgrades, I would also dial back a little of the armament, including its AS armament, to be sure the ship doesn't become a one-ship killing machine. Everything else seems pretty solid. And don't forget we still have the Recusant destroyers (probably broadly similar to the MunificentI, we just have to sort how to make it its own ship) and Lucrehulk battleships (definitely a large ship, so let's see a couple of those from FFG) yet to do.

For the Executor , one thing that could make assembling and managing the ship easier is deciding whether or not it can move. While it definitely had engines, it is consistently portrayed as sluggish compared to its Imperial class escorts in Death Squadron. Do we think that there is enough difference there to justify making the ship a multi-part station? Not needing to move it ought to help simplify issues like how to move it and when the Executor rams other ships (doesn't solve the other way around but it's something). It is a ship depending on who you ask 17K or 19K meters in length, that much bulk is bound to be difficult to maneuver and even relatively stationary compared to faster, rapidly maneuvering ships like Assault Frigates and CR90s, or even the notoriously sluggish Victory class. Not saying it's a perfect solution, but gameplay areas can only get so big and still be practical.

Lol, there wern't enough SSD threads already?

I was thinking double card, much like the epic ships in X-wing, fore and aft section with the ability to cripple the ship by destroying one side or the other. Practicallity on the table has been much of the concern in most threads, and that is one thing I can say with certainty that it will not be regardless of how we try.

We should also consider that its size alond and how it is based may be of concern when it comes to collisions during play. Do we just say non-epic ships that impact an epic ship are destroyed? Does it need a move diagram or do we just do speed 1, 1 Yaw? Can we assume it is so large and awkward that when it moves simply moved larger ships aside like squadrons? I was hoping the base Mel comes up with is tall enough that most ships simply fit under it.

A lot of good thoughts there.

My first impressions:

-Collisions are indeed likely to be one of the biggest hurdles. Allowing for collision-less overlapping would get around that but open its own can of worms, which might be even worse. My feeling is a "pushing" effect similar to squadrons is preferable, though again the consequences can be absolutely brutal so it must be done carefully. But keeping the collision rules as-is might also work.

-We could ask Mel to design the supports so that we can use a single uninterrupted base card for the entire ship, as in X-Wing. Otherwise, since the ship is built in three pieces (was it three?) with a base each, it makes sense that this will determine how many hull zones it has. The front and rear pieces would have three hull zones each, the central section would have two.

-It can probably all fit in a single card. All we'd need to squeeze in are the extra shield and dice icons. Alternatively, as you suggest, it could have two (or three) cards, each with its own set of defense tokens. The X-Wing rules seem to work fine, so I'd draw from those as far as possible.

-Spedwise, I would go as far as giving it speed 2... but no yaw at all. In practice, you'd still need to move at speed 1 for most of the game to avoid running out of room or wasting too many command dials to maneuver. But the occasional burst of speed can be achieved when needed.

EDIT: Four parts! I went over Mel's post again... man, this thing is HUGE ! Definitely going to need multiple cards. And special deployment rules.

I am also going to start taking photos of any models I have to replace card art. This is to avoid using any images that may cause concern.

That's very sensible. I haven't been as diligent as I should with requesting permissions so far.