The only problem with this, though, is that unless you just want the campaign to involve one VSD, one Corvette, and one Neb B Frigate, then you'd have to purchase this pack AND several others. Many potential players would hate it, even if it's understandable. There's simply not enough ships in the Core to make for an adequate campaign.

So in the end, if FFG would do this, it would likely be a free download, and since they can't make money off it, they'd wait until they have some spare time.

It would not be a problem to have only limited amount of ships. You just buy your fleets based on the plastic you have. One scenario in the campaign would only consist of ships you have.

Would FFG make money of this? Yes they would: by supplying components that one would not buy when just playing the tournaments, as transport vessels, star docks etc.

Every miniature game I have played could benefit from what you are saying and every one I have played (Which is lots) all want more Narrative.

SO then one company decided lets ease up on the awesome rules we have, and create a narrative for the players.

BIGGEST MISTAKE THEY DID.

You can create your own narrative let them create the tight balanced rules.

Who are you talking about?

Games workshop had some very good rules, but instead they decided to "Forge the Narrative" and the games rules have gone way down hill, all my friends got out of the game to get into Warmachine.

Two points about the 6 round limit:

1. I think its exactly the right amount. Games typically last 2-2.5 hours which is about the limit for me (and most people I know). Once we get to know the rules & ships more, 2 hour games will be the norm, and 400 point games will be a little longer - perfect.

2. You don't have to play 6 rounds (or use objectives). Play 8 rounds, play 10. Or play death matches. Its really up to you.

Regarding objectives, they are no more 'gamey' than similar mechanics in other games and they give an alternative to 'kill everything on the board' matches which get boring really quickly. I think its genius that they are part of fleet building, adding another layer to that aspect of the game (making the initiative bid and choice of first/second player more strategic) as well as to the main game itself.

My only gripe about the objectives is that there are not enough that award points for activities other than destruction.

I agree. We can do what we want with narrative. We're creative people. They've given us plenty of tools to make scenarios.

But a focus on tournament play creates a relatable experience for everyone and by having regular events, keeps players involved.

You want narrative. Make it. The same as Role Players have been doing for decades. You don't need modules. You don't need official FFG stories. Just make them up and go.

And as for the six turn limit, I'd prefer a casualty point. Something like the first player to gain 200 victory points forces his opponent from the field, but 6 turns is a good balance point. It lets games play out without dragging.

Darkness, pain, and chaos. With the destruction of the death star and the death of the emporer, the whole galaxy seemed to lose it's rudder. Some in the rebellion believed this would usher in a new area of prosperity and peace, a restoration of the old republic. If such was to be the prize, it was proving to be an elusive one. Once the empire found it's footing again, they pursued the rebels with an almost maniacal zeal, determined to punish them and reassert their authority. While the fall of the Emporer did not result in an immediate deathblow to the empire, the rebellion gained a great deal of support in many systems, more money, more personell, more resources and manufacturing capacity were big gains achieved by the rebellion. Some planets dared to openly align themselves with the fledgling "new republic" - an entity that existed more as an idea than a reality at this point. This created new problems for a rebellion which was trying to transform itself into a government. Previously, their 2 main objectives had been to avoid imperial forces and attack targets of opportunity when possible. They had operated more like guerillas in space than a true regular military force. Now that they had systems openly supporting them, they were forced to allocate forces to defend those systems, and this also had begun to force them into more direct confrontations with imperial forces. In addition to being outgunned, there were few rebel commanders who could take command of a sizeable fleet and suceed against the empire. It felt as if the whole galaxy was watching, analyzing every skirmish. The rebellion was desperate to keep the momentum going, and they needed to demonstrate that their new fledgling government could provide security to it's members. On the imperial side, there was dissaray at first, but there was still a chain of command to follow, and individual admirals were not overly concerned about actions at the senate level. fleet commanders were given areas of space to secure, and there was less oversight from above. Their mandate was to reassert imperial might, impose order, but prosecute rebel assets and sympathizers to the fullest possible extent.

If you like, if someone will generate scenarios and playtest them, I can write the fluff if you like it. We can make our own book, turn it into a PDF, and make it available for download for free.

Darkness, pain, and chaos. With the destruction of the death star and the death of the emporer, the whole galaxy seemed to lose it's rudder. Some in the rebellion believed this would usher in a new area of prosperity and peace, a restoration of the old republic. If such was to be the prize, it was proving to be an elusive one. Once the empire found it's footing again, they pursued the rebels with an almost maniacal zeal, determined to punish them and reassert their authority. While the fall of the Emporer did not result in an immediate deathblow to the empire, the rebellion gained a great deal of support in many systems, more money, more personell, more resources and manufacturing capacity were big gains achieved by the rebellion. Some planets dared to openly align themselves with the fledgling "new republic" - an entity that existed more as an idea than a reality at this point. This created new problems for a rebellion which was trying to transform itself into a government. Previously, their 2 main objectives had been to avoid imperial forces and attack targets of opportunity when possible. They had operated more like guerillas in space than a true regular military force. Now that they had systems openly supporting them, they were forced to allocate forces to defend those systems, and this also had begun to force them into more direct confrontations with imperial forces. In addition to being outgunned, there were few rebel commanders who could take command of a sizeable fleet and suceed against the empire. It felt as if the whole galaxy was watching, analyzing every skirmish. The rebellion was desperate to keep the momentum going, and they needed to demonstrate that their new fledgling government could provide security to it's members. On the imperial side, there was dissaray at first, but there was still a chain of command to follow, and individual admirals were not overly concerned about actions at the senate level. fleet commanders were given areas of space to secure, and there was less oversight from above. Their mandate was to reassert imperial might, impose order, but prosecute rebel assets and sympathizers to the fullest possible extent.

The whole "shoot a fighter and run" thing doesn't actually work though, mostly because of objective cards.

If you play with someone like that or think you might, underbid by enough to make sure you're the 2nd player, then load your mission deck with cards that punish that kind of behavior.

For example Contested Outpost and Intel Sweep reward 'free' VP by simply controlling part of the board. So while he's running you're racking up VP's. You get between 15 and 20 points per token, it won't take long to have enough VP to counter that one lost fighter squad. Plus then the other person has to engage your forces, where you want him to.

Likewise, Minefield would make running difficult.

Opening Salvo means you have a better chance of doing some damage, and as long as you can crack a shield and land some damage you'll get VP's for that.

Darkness, pain, and chaos. With the destruction of the death star and the death of the emporer, the whole galaxy seemed to lose it's rudder. Some in the rebellion believed this would usher in a new area of prosperity and peace, a restoration of the old republic. If such was to be the prize, it was proving to be an elusive one. Once the empire found it's footing again, they pursued the rebels with an almost maniacal zeal, determined to punish them and reassert their authority. While the fall of the Emporer did not result in an immediate deathblow to the empire, the rebellion gained a great deal of support in many systems, more money, more personell, more resources and manufacturing capacity were big gains achieved by the rebellion. Some planets dared to openly align themselves with the fledgling "new republic" - an entity that existed more as an idea than a reality at this point. This created new problems for a rebellion which was trying to transform itself into a government. Previously, their 2 main objectives had been to avoid imperial forces and attack targets of opportunity when possible. They had operated more like guerillas in space than a true regular military force. Now that they had systems openly supporting them, they were forced to allocate forces to defend those systems, and this also had begun to force them into more direct confrontations with imperial forces. In addition to being outgunned, there were few rebel commanders who could take command of a sizeable fleet and suceed against the empire. It felt as if the whole galaxy was watching, analyzing every skirmish. The rebellion was desperate to keep the momentum going, and they needed to demonstrate that their new fledgling government could provide security to it's members. On the imperial side, there was dissaray at first, but there was still a chain of command to follow, and individual admirals were not overly concerned about actions at the senate level. fleet commanders were given areas of space to secure, and there was less oversight from above. Their mandate was to reassert imperial might, impose order, but prosecute rebel assets and sympathizers to the fullest possible extent.

Such a scenario sounds like a great way to get Corran Horn, Thrawn, and interdictors (to name a few beloved people/ships from the EU) into the game. Count me in!

Although I never played the game, it sounds like the OP wants to play Empire at War with Armada miniatures. It sounds like fun, but that kind of campaign scenario seems to work better in computer games because of all of the moving parts involved. Then again, a campaign or two for Armada mirroring the way Imperial Assault work seems like it could work...

"Such a scenario sounds like a great way to get Corran Horn, Thrawn, and interdictors (to name a few beloved people/ships from the EU) into the game. Count me in!"

Agree totally. Would also like to see the dreadnaught released. All of these, along with transports, planetary defenses (ion cannons!) etc, would enable a bunch of extra objective cards and some narrative play, IMO, with scenario books, etc.

Using Corran Horn might be a problem. We all know, he is kinda a Jedi, and he's pilotin' an X-Wing. How would you make his stats, if possible even with points, without people complaining etc. especially since Luke is no more a pilot in this times. A really hard conundrum... Me, as a fanboy of Zsinj, I have similar problems. Whom could I use as the Soontir Fel imposer, who is described as having a virtually indistinguishable way of piloting?

Although I never played the game, it sounds like the OP wants to play Empire at War with Armada miniatures. It sounds like fun, but that kind of campaign scenario seems to work better in computer games because of all of the moving parts involved. Then again, a campaign or two for Armada mirroring the way Imperial Assault work seems like it could work...

The idea of the campaign would be to have a 'battle generator', whereby the fleets are not necessarily matched in points and scenarios are mixed in. Added advantage is that the result of battles would have implications further on in the campaign. This would also have repercussions in how you are playing

I would like an expansion of this nature but FFG are a refreshing change from the direction GW have taken where rules are secondary to the story and collection of models. They can stick 'forging the narrative' where the sun doesn't shine.

Although I never played the game, it sounds like the OP wants to play Empire at War with Armada miniatures. It sounds like fun, but that kind of campaign scenario seems to work better in computer games because of all of the moving parts involved. Then again, a campaign or two for Armada mirroring the way Imperial Assault work seems like it could work...

The idea of the campaign would be to have a 'battle generator', whereby the fleets are not necessarily matched in points and scenarios are mixed in. Added advantage is that the result of battles would have implications further on in the campaign. This would also have repercussions in how you are playing

Yeah, the idea of the Rebels showing up to a fight with the Imperials with equvilanet fleet (in terms of points, in the metric used in this game) strikes me as a bit odd. The movies wouldn't have been as interesting if the odds of a Rebel victory weren't as long as they were. Those long odds, regardless of whether Han wanted to hear them or not, made the triumphs at Yavin and Endor all that much more impressive/important.

It seems that Imperial Assault, from what I know of it, does a better job of capturing the "overpowering" nature of the Empire vis-a-vis the "insignicant Rebellion."

But, hey, I like playing with the imperial ships, so I'm a bit biased. I think Ties should be even cheaper so that they can be flown at a much closer to 2:1 ratio to the number of fighters fielded by the Rebels in a game. I know you'd have to rework the current Tie stats a bit to make it "fair" for Rebel players, but it sure seemed like there were at least twice as many ties as rebel fighters at Endor. Anyway...

I understand why people like the current setup more than a campaign/string of scenario style of play like you're suggesting, but I sure do hope someone comes up with a campaign mode, official or not.

Although I never played the game, it sounds like the OP wants to play Empire at War with Armada miniatures. It sounds like fun, but that kind of campaign scenario seems to work better in computer games because of all of the moving parts involved. Then again, a campaign or two for Armada mirroring the way Imperial Assault work seems like it could work...

The idea of the campaign would be to have a 'battle generator', whereby the fleets are not necessarily matched in points and scenarios are mixed in. Added advantage is that the result of battles would have implications further on in the campaign. This would also have repercussions in how you are playing

Yeah, the idea of the Rebels showing up to a fight with the Imperials with equvilanet fleet (in terms of points, in the metric used in this game) strikes me as a bit odd. The movies wouldn't have been as interesting if the odds of a Rebel victory weren't as long as they were. Those long odds, regardless of whether Han wanted to hear them or not, made the triumphs at Yavin and Endor all that much more impressive/important.

It seems that Imperial Assault, from what I know of it, does a better job of capturing the "overpowering" nature of the Empire vis-a-vis the "insignicant Rebellion."

But, hey, I like playing with the imperial ships, so I'm a bit biased. I think Ties should be even cheaper so that they can be flown at a much closer to 2:1 ratio to the number of fighters fielded by the Rebels in a game. I know you'd have to rework the current Tie stats a bit to make it "fair" for Rebel players, but it sure seemed like there were at least twice as many ties as rebel fighters at Endor. Anyway...

I understand why people like the current setup more than a campaign/string of scenario style of play like you're suggesting, but I sure do hope someone comes up with a campaign mode, official or not.

If you want that scenario you alter the point spread and create uneven objectives. The rebels won because they had hidden objectives like, race to this spot, blow it up, win, while the inperials were playing blind defense and trying to figure out the rebels game. In a tabletop game that kind of situation isn't as fun. It's a fantastic storytelling technique. So like I said, you want to tell stories go for it. But understand that the game cannot functionally be designed around that concept and isn't meant to model specific instances.

I've been tinkering with meshing a Diplomacy board (suitably modified for Star Wars) with each fleet/army representing 300 points with Armada campaign rules, essentially making Armada the sub-game for the combat resolution, with experience thrown in to make each fleet and squadron gain abilities after every battle (with persistent damage rules.)

Although I never played the game, it sounds like the OP wants to play Empire at War with Armada miniatures. It sounds like fun, but that kind of campaign scenario seems to work better in computer games because of all of the moving parts involved. Then again, a campaign or two for Armada mirroring the way Imperial Assault work seems like it could work...

The idea of the campaign would be to have a 'battle generator', whereby the fleets are not necessarily matched in points and scenarios are mixed in. Added advantage is that the result of battles would have implications further on in the campaign. This would also have repercussions in how you are playing

Yeah, the idea of the Rebels showing up to a fight with the Imperials with equvilanet fleet (in terms of points, in the metric used in this game) strikes me as a bit odd. The movies wouldn't have been as interesting if the odds of a Rebel victory weren't as long as they were. Those long odds, regardless of whether Han wanted to hear them or not, made the triumphs at Yavin and Endor all that much more impressive/important.

It seems that Imperial Assault, from what I know of it, does a better job of capturing the "overpowering" nature of the Empire vis-a-vis the "insignicant Rebellion."

But, hey, I like playing with the imperial ships, so I'm a bit biased. I think Ties should be even cheaper so that they can be flown at a much closer to 2:1 ratio to the number of fighters fielded by the Rebels in a game. I know you'd have to rework the current Tie stats a bit to make it "fair" for Rebel players, but it sure seemed like there were at least twice as many ties as rebel fighters at Endor. Anyway...

I understand why people like the current setup more than a campaign/string of scenario style of play like you're suggesting, but I sure do hope someone comes up with a campaign mode, official or not.

To be fair, I recall some ImperiL officers arguing over the danger of the Rebel fleet showing up on the first Death Star. The Imperial Fleet was usually spread out across the Galaxy, both trying to engage the Rebels, and to prevent new rebellions from erupting. So, other than a trap set by the Emperor, I expect most engagements played out fairly similarly to an Armada fight. Imperial ships on patrol, some Rebs show up for a quick strike, and fade away before reinforcements can arrive.

Although I never played the game, it sounds like the OP wants to play Empire at War with Armada miniatures. It sounds like fun, but that kind of campaign scenario seems to work better in computer games because of all of the moving parts involved. Then again, a campaign or two for Armada mirroring the way Imperial Assault work seems like it could work...

The idea of the campaign would be to have a 'battle generator', whereby the fleets are not necessarily matched in points and scenarios are mixed in. Added advantage is that the result of battles would have implications further on in the campaign. This would also have repercussions in how you are playing

Yeah, the idea of the Rebels showing up to a fight with the Imperials with equvilanet fleet (in terms of points, in the metric used in this game) strikes me as a bit odd. The movies wouldn't have been as interesting if the odds of a Rebel victory weren't as long as they were. Those long odds, regardless of whether Han wanted to hear them or not, made the triumphs at Yavin and Endor all that much more impressive/important.

It seems that Imperial Assault, from what I know of it, does a better job of capturing the "overpowering" nature of the Empire vis-a-vis the "insignicant Rebellion."

But, hey, I like playing with the imperial ships, so I'm a bit biased. I think Ties should be even cheaper so that they can be flown at a much closer to 2:1 ratio to the number of fighters fielded by the Rebels in a game. I know you'd have to rework the current Tie stats a bit to make it "fair" for Rebel players, but it sure seemed like there were at least twice as many ties as rebel fighters at Endor. Anyway...

I understand why people like the current setup more than a campaign/string of scenario style of play like you're suggesting, but I sure do hope someone comes up with a campaign mode, official or not.

To be fair, I recall some ImperiL officers arguing over the danger of the Rebel fleet showing up on the first Death Star. The Imperial Fleet was usually spread out across the Galaxy, both trying to engage the Rebels, and to prevent new rebellions from erupting. So, other than a trap set by the Emperor, I expect most engagements played out fairly similarly to an Armada fight. Imperial ships on patrol, some Rebs show up for a quick strike, and fade away before reinforcements can arrive.

Yeah, the idea of the Rebels showing up to a fight with the Imperials with equvilanet fleet (in terms of points, in the metric used in this game) strikes me as a bit odd. The movies wouldn't have been as interesting if the odds of a Rebel victory weren't as long as they were. Those long odds, regardless of whether Han wanted to hear them or not, made the triumphs at Yavin and Endor all that much more impressive/important.

I love wargaming historical scenarios, which are rarely (if ever) "fair", but they're better as one-off scenarios rather than a consistent (and more importantly replayable) game. Armada's actually pretty good compared to most other games; the ships and squadrons have very different characteristics and are suited for very different objectives, all of which are included in the base game (the objectives, I mean).

So somewhat restricted fleets, besides being a good feature for play- and replayability, can still represent a bit of asymmetry. The points value is a combination of all of the features of a ship or squadron, but depending on the objective some of those features will be far more tactically useful than others. In a standup fight over a Contested Outpost or when employing Advanced Gunnery techniques, the Empire's superiority in close-range firepower and armor will make their 300 points "worth" a lot more; while the Alliance's smaller and swifter vessels are well-suited for Intel Sweeps or delivering a Precision Strike.

signed in to say I agree with OP and would love to see a campaign-based strategic metagame developed (by fans).

I agree that the "canned" battles of armada feel contrived and a bit lifeless compared to the rich universe many of us love and experience in the novels and EU. I would love to see battles over planets, mining operations, transports and freighters, and blockades as a part of a massive meta game.

I would think a system conquest could be fun with say, 7 planets players fight over for resources and upgrades. But running a single battle takes so long that it would take a lot of willpower to continue. Plus having more than 2 people can make that longer.

signed in to say I agree with OP and would love to see a campaign-based strategic metagame developed (by fans).

I agree that the "canned" battles of armada feel contrived and a bit lifeless compared to the rich universe many of us love and experience in the novels and EU. I would love to see battles over planets, mining operations, transports and freighters, and blockades as a part of a massive meta game.

Where there's an imagination, there's a way.

I do not know if FFG is actively monitoring these forums, but if yes:

Dear FFG, could it be possible to add a SW:Armada subforum called 'Scenarios and Campaigns'. This way we could share our design efforts in one place.

Thx!

Yours Truly,

The Village Idiot

I like the idea of campaign missions for Armada. It should be reasonably simple to whip up a structure for it. I actually like to get away from the tournament mix/max combo scene. Run larger ship count games with only a couple personalities. I did that in xwing a lot as well and it makes for a much more cinematic experience.

I would think a system conquest could be fun with say, 7 planets players fight over for resources and upgrades. But running a single battle takes so long that it would take a lot of willpower to continue. Plus having more than 2 people can make that longer.

So, as a community, we cloud source it and report the results back to the community, and a campaign manager updates the map and team resource points accordingly

Honestly, the rules are setup for xxx point matches.

If we want a campaign, we will need to change the rules to accommodate unbalanced scenarios.

Think of it like this, the Rebels would have been slaughtered attacking the first Death Star, as the Death Star was pushing out squadron commands...

So some of the scenarios would need to suspend the separate squadron phase, if you wanted to replicate a Rebel fighter strike against a patrolling Vic.

Or suspend the 1/3 point limit on squadron values.

Maybe restrict imperial ships to their squadron value, but don't place this limit on the Rebel ships.

Do these changes apply across the board, or just during a specific scenario

How would you adjust the point value of fighters to accommodate the above changes?

By the time you are done figuring out the appropriate rule changes, point changes etc, it would have been much cheaper to just mod Sins of a Solar Empire, play with a friend, and simulate the battle in that.