In the topic about the Super-Transports and Über-YT-1300 it was clear, that people disagreed how much fighters a stand realy represents.

It makes no real difference, but what is your impression?


I am assuming a fighter stand is for a full squadron of ships (12), while others claim it to be just 3, because there are just three (total out of scale) models on the stand.

To me it wouldnt make much sense to have so few fighters in a battle and the whole game feels more like a fleet action if this a squadrons and not a 3 craft Flight (are there no names for 2 and 3 craft formations in english?).

Survey poll : Like this if you think a flight stand represents 12 (fighter) crafts.

Survey poll : Like this if you think a flight stand represents 3 (fighter) crafts.

Neither, it represents 1 squadron, which is an arbitrary and relative strength.

FFG has been strongly influenced by their thinking about the fighters and ships from their experiences in developing X-Wing and it shows here that they have tried to capture the essence of the fighters character without being bogged down in minute balance details by specifying exact numbers of each ships in each squadron for comparison against each other.

I think the closest analogy might be to say it roughly represents 60-70ish points of X-Wing fighters

Which could be 3 X-Wings, 6 Tie Fighters, 1 Falcon with upgrades, or 3 B-Wings. etc etc

(I say Falcon + upgrades because lets face it - noone fields a blank Falcon and if it was the only think you fielded then you would pimp it out to the max).

Edit, this theory of points can be cross-verified by looking at the Corvette (CR-90) which features in both X-Wing and Armada. An Armada corvette is about 44 points, which is about 2 hero squadrons. In X-Wing a corvette (with armaments) is about 130 points, which is about double the points value per squadron I mentioned. (60-70)

In Armada a single squadron of fighters would be unlikely to blow up a corvette, though Farlander, Rhymer or Luke might give it a bloody nose, and likewise in X-Wing 60-70ish points, depending on ship, against a kitted up Corvette, would also be hard pressed to take one out (but more possible) and if it was B-Wings or similar could bring it close to destruction.

This theory also ties in nicely with the introduction of the new incoming wave 2 rogues and villains - who are a similar points level for a single ship (+ upgrades), so fits this interpretation.

1 fighter stand represents 1 squadron in my mind, which usually consists of 12 fighters. It makes sense for the methodological Imperials to have a fixed number of fighters in their squadrons, and we know Imperial star destroyers had 6 squadrons of 72 fighters & bombers total = 12 per squadron.

For the rebels, fighter squadron sizes are irregular until post Endor. From the starwars wiki: "During the following year, Rogue Squadron eventually swelled to twelve—regular size for a New Republic starfighter squadron."

Neither, it represents 1 squadron, which is an arbitrary and relative strength.

I think the closest analogy might be to say it roughly represents 60-70ish points of X-Wing fighters

Which could be 3 X-Wings, 6 Tie Fighters, 1 Falcon with upgrades, or 3 B-Wings. etc etc

Edit, this idea works with both the CR-90 in both X-Wing and Armada, as in Armada a single squadron of fighters would be unlikely to blow up a corvette, though Farlander, Rhymer or Luke might give it a bloody nose, and likewise in X-Wing 60-70ish points, depending on ship, would also be hard pressed to take one out (but more possible), and also the introduction of the new incoming wave 2 rogues and villains - who are a similar points level for a single ship, so fits this interpretation.

However a squadron is somehting around 12-24 crafts in reality:

(A squadron in air force , army aviation , or naval aviation is mainly a unit comprising a number of military aircraft and their aircrews , usually of the same type, typically with 12 to 24 aircraft, sometimes divided into three or four flights , depending on aircraft type and air force. Land based squadrons equipped with heavier type aircraft such as long-range bombers, or cargo aircraft, or air refueling tankers have around 12 aircraft as a typical authorization, while most fighter equipped units have an authorized number of 18 to 24.)

and 12 in Star Wars. So why should it be 3 X-Wings or 6 TIE-Fighters? And why the different number?

1 fighter stand represents 1 squadron in my mind, which usually consists of 12 fighters. It makes sense for the methodological Imperials to have a fixed number of fighters in their squadrons, and we know Imperial star destroyers had 6 squadrons of 72 fighters & bombers total = 12 per squadron.

For the rebels, fighter squadron sizes are irregular until post Endor. From the starwars wiki: "During the following year, Rogue Squadron eventually swelled to twelve—regular size for a New Republic starfighter squadron."

I agree that it "Should" be 12, but gameplay wise it just doesnt feel that way - its way smaller.

If it was 12 then heroes - being only a single one of those 12 ships, should be far, far less powerful then they are.

Which brings me back to my argument - that its not a fixed number, its a relative value of strength inherited from FFG's views on the ships from X-Wing.

To insist that they must be 12 because that is what a squadron traditionally is, is to completely ignore how the game actually plays.

1 fighter stand represents 1 squadron in my mind, which usually consists of 12 fighters. It makes sense for the methodological Imperials to have a fixed number of fighters in their squadrons, and we know Imperial star destroyers had 6 squadrons of 72 fighters & bombers total = 12 per squadron.

For the rebels, fighter squadron sizes are irregular until post Endor. From the starwars wiki: "During the following year, Rogue Squadron eventually swelled to twelve—regular size for a New Republic starfighter squadron."

I agree that it "Should" be 12, but gameplay wise it just doesnt feel that way - its way smaller.

If it was 12 then heroes - being only a single one of those 12 ships, should be far, far less powerful then they are.

Which brings me back to my argument - that its not a fixed number, its a relative value of strength inherited from FFG's views on the ships from X-Wing.

To insist that they must be 12 because that is what a squadron traditionally is, is to completely ignore how the game actually plays.

Yes because heroes in Star Wars have always taken a backseat to realism, and have barely any impact in the movies In any case I always figured the 'hero' effect isn't just the hero himself but his influence on the entire squadron he is in. As for your earlier example of a fighter squadron vs a corvette: in the movies the Falcon takes down 4 Tie-fighters without suffering any damage, I assume it could have taken on 6-8 with relative ease as well. So is it really that odd that a corellian corvette which is significantly bigger, heavier shielded and better armed than the Falcon, not to mention established in the EU as being pretty much an anti-fighter platform, can take on a squadron and win?

So it basically depends on perception of relative strengths etc. whether 12 strong squadrons make sense or not. To me they do.

Even comparing heroes to heroes, the coming scum and villians expansion would seem to throw the argument for 12 out the window. You can't convince me that a single YT-1300 can absorb more damage than 12 X-Wings. 3 X-Wings I could buy. Even if you say "oh well, it's Han," you have Luke and Wedge sitting over in their X-Wing squadrons only able to absorb the same amount of damage as any other X-Wing.

In game terminology they're called Squadrons, so I assume they're full squadrons - 12 ships.

It's just an arbitrary unit. I won't want to dabble in that nitty detail

Even comparing heroes to heroes, the coming scum and villians expansion would seem to throw the argument for 12 out the window. You can't convince me that a single YT-1300 can absorb more damage than 12 X-Wings. 3 X-Wings I could buy. Even if you say "oh well, it's Han," you have Luke and Wedge sitting over in their X-Wing squadrons only able to absorb the same amount of damage as any other X-Wing.

Or the transports were just made silly strong to sell them...

In one of my other favourite games, War at Sea, a fighter squadron stand had 3 miniatures on it representing up to 25 aircraft i.e. A carrier which carried 75 aircraft could base 3 fighter stands on it. A patrol bomber squadron stand had a single miniature on it representing about 3 aircraft. (Sidenote: they're way smaller than Armada fighter minis and came fully painted.)

In Armada I think a squadron stand represents 1 squadron, how many actual fighters this represents is irrelevant.

However FFG could be using the term "squadron" as an generic term meaning a group of fighters and not a literal term meaning 12 fighters.

W@S is an abstract game not an accurate simulation and I'm treating Armada the same way. As long as the game is fun to play I'm going to accept it the way FFG wants it to be played.

Each squadron stand represents exactly "abuncha" fighters.

This game is macro not micro.

Hence a Squadron on the table top is a number of fighters that equate to the effectiveness of the rules associated with them.

Trying to pin exact numbers to them is futile.

This game is macro not micro.

Hence a Squadron on the table top is a number of fighters that equate to the effectiveness of the rules associated with them.

Trying to pin exact numbers to them is futile.

Only so long until somebody wonders why an YT-1300 has 7 health and 12 Y-Wings together only 6

hence why putting numerical values to the number of ships in a squadron is futile...

again

if hull > 0, each squadron represents "enough"

if hull = 0, each squadron represents "none"

The FFG forums really need a "beating a dead horse" smiley.

in the movies the Falcon takes down 4 Tie-fighters without suffering any damage,

When? The only time I can think of when it was precisely 4 ties vs the falcon was escaping the Death Star and the falcon was severely damaged in the fight. (Hear me baby, hold together).

However at the battle of Endor the Falcon is a Tie Fighter killing machine!

I supposed that it couldn't be 12 fighters since until RotJ, Luke and Wedge are part of the same squadron. I assumed they were part of a flight of 4-6 fighters with the offensive and defensive power being a generalization of their effects on the overall battle.

However at the battle of Endor the Falcon is a Tie Fighter killing machine!

It didnt kill a single TIE Fighter there in the movie (Although three TIE Interceptors that were chasing a Rebel Fighter).

The hull numbers comparison can go both ways: yes, 12 Y-wings have less hull than a YT-1300, but they're also comparable to the shielded side of a Corvette (each take 6 damage to destroy). 3 Y-wings being as durable as a Corvette makes no sense either...in fact, skip the middleman, the YT-1300 can weather more damage than an unshielded Nebulon-B.

If one stand of X-Wings represents 3 ships, then 4 of them totals 1 squadron, and in game terms could take out an ISD in an engagement, which isn't a thing in the lore except under exceptional circumstances. 4 squadrons versus an ISD seems more reasonable. At the same time, this means a Corvette could destroy 12 TIE squadrons in the same engagement, so the numbers will never come out quite right no matter how you squint at them. Being a game means that the effectiveness has been scaled in a non-linear manner in the same way the model size has.

The squadrons are balanced against each other regardless of whether they're both 3 ships or both 12. In terms of their anti-ship effectiveness, and in terms of lore accuracy, I choose to believe they are squadrons of twelve. To me, a Star Destroyer launching 6 TIE fighters simply makes no sense.

If others prefer to see the scale differently, there's no hard evidence that going to prove anyone right or wrong; like the "correct" size for a new mini, it's mostly a case of what feels right to you.

we do have to remember that scale means jack diddly next to gameplay mechanics and thus we should never think about it that much anyway

something that is helpful to remember, though, is that squadron hull and cap ship hull don't mean even close to the same thing

squadrons only take damage from anti-squadron batteries and ships only take damage from anti-ship batteries plus the dice batteries on other ship arcs

a 7 hp yt-1300 is not actually more durable than a neb because it's not defending against the same kind of damage.

now why a yt-1300 has more hull than a y-wing squadron is a question best reserved for my first point