Hello

I have been watching some tournaments in you tube and have to say I really hate to see the same faction fight each other.

Why would this be allowed.
This is Star wars for gods sake , were the rebels fight the empire. Not empire against empire or rebels against rebels.

To really find the best armada player they should play both sides like chess.

A good rule would be that they played 2 matches against each other.

Once as the rebels and once as the empire. The one with the most total points is the winner.

What do you fellow gamers think out there. Am I the only one who hate this....

I didn't really like it with xwing either.

However, in tournament like settings, it's not really about theme, it's about competition and all these plastic toys represent are combinations of dice and abilities regardless of what they look like (imperial ship or rebel ship).

That would make the tournaments last for a very very long time, something like 12-15 hours for 3 rounds. Also it would raise the cost of entry for players that want to do tournaments because they know have to buy fleets for both factions (I know a lot of people, myself included, did this, but in my area it is more common that people only invested in multiple of a ship for a chosen faction). Also it is consistent with the lore (sort of) post-Endor. The Empire fragmented, leading to warlords and fiefdoms squabbling with the Imperial Remnant and New Republic, so from that prespective it doesn't really bother me.

Am I the only one who hate this....

Blue on Blue fights are as old as wargaming. You can't really demand that someone collects enough stuff to play more then one faction, it just isn't practical.

You also can't expect people to play a round with 2 games of Armada, that would make a 5 round tournament take up a whole weekend.

Plus some people only like to play a given side, they would hate it if they had to play the other faction because the two sides don't play the same. Being the best player doesn't mean you can play both factions equally, because the play style of one faction may suit you better then another.

Tournaments aren't about lore/fluff, they're about seeing who the best player is, that means letting them play with the best list they can come up with, the one they'll play the most effectively. Expecting them to field two lists actually runs counter to that.

I don't like it either, so I personally collect both sides and bring the opposite faction to what my opponent wants to play

of course, I was traumatized by 40k (the marines...oh god the marines...)

in a tournie setting, you're list locked so no dice there

it's not so bad though. Unless the lists are literally identical, even wave 1 mirror matches featuring the same ships become wildly different due to different commanders, squadrons, upgrades, and even numbers of ships used.

I like to think of mirror matches as training exercises. It gives me enough mental fluff to suspend disbelief. At least that's what I rationalized with my 40k armies...

I'm sure I've read about more than one high ranking Imperial deciding that he would be better leader than the Emperor, so Imperial on Imperial action doesn't bother me. I don't know if the rebel faction had much fracturing going on to have the same justification however.

I understand what you all say , but I just cant agree. I would never sit down and play a game against the same faction.

For me this is not the real star wars feeling.....and for me this is the whole heart of the game.

For I want to get the real star wars feeling like the movies give me. And for me a battle with Darth Vader against Dart Vader is just crap and will turn me of.

But that's just me.......I had to buy into the whole package because as the true Star Wars fan I am.

For me a new the cost would be high , but eighter you go for it or you do not. I would not buy half a game.

And for the those afraid of to long tournaments. Let the players draw on who is the rebel player or the empire. And play this one game then. At least it is random...

I'm not going to go so far as to say 'I love it', but I'm okay with Imperial vs. Imperial and, to a degree, Rebel vs. Rebel fights. But my source for saying it is the same, TIE Fighter.

It depends how you justify things: the Rogue Admiral Harkov and his superior fighter squadrons and rebel support has made a fantastic cornerstone to not only my enjoyment of Imperial vs. Imperial matches, but a few matches that I've played with Imperial and Rebels on the same team (it was a 4 way 'bring a fleet' and there was 3 Imperial vs. 1 rebel fleet. Naturally 3:1 isn't fair or all that great, so it turned out differently).

Besides, there was lots of warring Imperial factions in the EU, and enough captured Imperial vessels to make for a reasonable assortment of potential instances occurring beyond the usual 'training exercise' example.

As for the rebels, well, right now it comes down to one thing: their ships are mostly commercial grade (aside from the Assault Frigate MKII). Seeing Nebulons or CR-90's fighting it out could mean that they're everyone from Demok warriors, to the Rebel alliance, to a backwater Imperial presence (That wouldn't explain the presence of some top end starfighters, like the A-wing and B-wing, but Y-wings are sure common, X-wings I think I remember hearing of, and picking up some Z-95's to mount on either TIE fighter or X wing dials would make things all well and good as far as I'm concerned.)

Internecine fighting happens in such a big galaxy, some of the more interesting, and balanced feeling matches can really be with the exact same faction fighting it out, using all their tricks and various fighters which suddenly have different dimensions because their opponents capabilities have been changed. Tournaments can be thought of as a fantastic instance of 'training competitions' and 'fleet exercises', to periods of incredible strife in a sector, with one warlord coming out on top. Or, you know, just a game of skill between highly motivated and driven gamers... your choice on the 'narrative'.

Hence, why I have two standing Imperial 'lists', one for a turncoat faction, and one for loyalist Imperials... what's that you say, my GW background is showing? Yeah, well... .yeah.

I'm not afraid of long tournaments, I am afraid of very limited attendance at tournaments because you require a player to play both factions. FFG would be drug over the coals if they created such a policy as it would be seen as a money grab.

Additionally such a policy only serves to limit the game as you only ever expect to play against a certain faction and never have to consider playing the mirror match and what challenges that would entail.

Lastly Imperial on Imperial combat is very much a tenant of the Star Wars un8verse. Not allowing that would be directly contradicting alot of the source material the game is created from.

I would never sit down and play a game against the same faction.

Then don't play in Tournaments. Because the way those work isn't based on if you agree with them or not, and this frankly isn't open for discussion.

We're not trying to tell you why we think it's a good idea or something. We're telling you why it is the way it is.

Also it would make list building easier... If I knew I only had to face Imperial lists, I'd be able to better streamline my build then I could if I knew I'd have to face both factions.

Let the players draw on who is the rebel player or the empire.

You still don't get it. Some people prefer to play Faction X and others Faction Y, some don't care. But for those who do care, you can not expect them to buy models for, and build a list for a faction they do not want to play. That goes for pretty much every miniature game out there.

If blue vs blue isn't something you care to play, then the answer is simple, don't plan on taking part in a tournament. You would also likely need to avoid pickup games at a LGS, because you will run into people there who only have one faction and the option is either blue on blue or not playing at all.

I dislike mirror matches, but it would probably be seen as unfair and greedy if FFG required players to bring both a Rebel AND Imperial Fleet to an event.

I collect and play both factions, so that in casual or league games I let my opponent choose his faction, then I simply bring out an opposing faction list.

I've started thinking now about the idea of a tournament which would be purely Imperial vs Rebel. Here's what I've come up with:

A) The "easy" way

- Everyone has to bring 2 lists, one Imperial and one Rebel. Each round, the 2 players flip to see who is playing as who.

- This means forcing players to spend twice as much money on ships, and forcing some people to play as a faction they have zero interest in playing.

B) The more complicated way

- Players sign up for the tournament in advance, with there being an equal number of spots for Imperial and Rebel players.

- For the first round, each Imperial player is paired up against a random Rebel player. For each following round, players are paired off in order of ranking (top Imperial player vs top Rebel player, 2nd place Imperial vs 2nd place Rebel, etc). Basically, it's like a modification of the swiss system.

- It is unlikely that you will have an equal number of players wanting to play each faction as their first choice, so you may need to offer an incentive to players who are willing to switch faction for the sake of balance. (A discount entry for those who are willing to be put in either faction maybe?)

- It does open up a greater variety of awards that can be offered. Best score overall, best score from each faction (so 2 awards for this one), an award for every member of the faction that scored the highest total points, etc.

I think B could actually make for a fun tourny, although it would require a lot more managing to set up and run, so I suspect that organisers would just dump A on us.

I understand what you all say , but I just cant agree. I would never sit down and play a game against the same faction.

For me this is not the real star wars feeling.....and for me this is the whole heart of the game.

For I want to get the real star wars feeling like the movies give me. And for me a battle with Darth Vader against Dart Vader is just crap and will turn me of.

But that's just me.......I had to buy into the whole package because as the true Star Wars fan I am.

For me a new the cost would be high , but eighter you go for it or you do not. I would not buy half a game.

And for the those afraid of to long tournaments. Let the players draw on who is the rebel player or the empire. And play this one game then. At least it is random...

Some people either don't like one play style and some can't buy both sides. Why not play the other side then? If it is primarily YOUR issue, other players shouldn't have to pay money or sacrifice their play style for YOUR sake.

God I love a good discussion. I know you guys love the game as much as me. And because of the price of this game we would probably have to play like this. But you don't have to like it.

And it would have been great if the people holding the tournaments where required to have a complete set of both sides they had to borrow so even the poorest man could play it like it should have been. The way this is going I think it is not long before someone accept any ship in a 300 points game. A mixed fleet with rebels and empire ships...:-)

For me I have bought a complete set so I may invite friends or family to come to play like it is supposed to be played.

The way it goes now I think Obi Wan and Yoda screams out....no...no...no not like that :-)

Why would I ever want to play Rebs?? To me, having to play Rebs would be totally unfun. Buying reb ships would be a waste of money....and being forced to play Rebs unthinkable.

So I'm ok with mirror matches. There's plenty on the EU to support breakaway factions and reb warlords, so this works.

I've started thinking now about the idea of a tournament which would be purely Imperial vs Rebel. Here's what I've come up with:

A) The "easy" way

...

B) The more complicated way

...

I'm not a huge fan of A, because of the flaws you mentioned, Nekomatafuyu. It's just too restrictive, and I know it wouldn't fit anything I'd enjoy playing either. Tournaments take a lot of practice for quality preparation, and that's splitting the focus. Besides, it's also exactly what Vanor said, a whole half of the experience (blue on blue) is gone, and those make significant differences and widen the array of possibilities of both fleet building and objective selection.

I do like B, even if it has some of the same problems as A. Notably, rebel vs. Imperial still feels more like a play testing focus group to see which side the playerbase has found more balanced, and then there's the issues of organization. Now, add in with some minor campaign booklet for the tournament, and some interesting support and sure, I bet you'd find people willing to do it (I might even try something like that out). Still, it isn't showing who the best overall Armada player is in practice (as it's still restricting the options by narrowing the tactical field).... but it does sound like a lot of fun .

Anything that would force me to use rebel ships would ruin it for me. I will never participate in any organized event as anything but imperials.

Now, add in with some minor campaign booklet for the tournament, and some interesting support and sure, I bet you'd find people willing to do it (I might even try something like that out). Still, it isn't showing who the best overall Armada player is in practice (as it's still restricting the options by narrowing the tactical field).... but it does sound like a lot of fun .

It's funny you should mention that - my inspiration for this idea came from a Babylon 5: ACTA campaign weekend (rather than a tourny weekend). Agreed, it wouldn't be a pure tourny to show who is best overall, but I do hope the idea would combine the best elements of a "for fun" event along with some level of competition (be it between individuals or between factions).

You have me wondering now if I could add a twist somehow so that within the same faction the players are trying to help each other (so that their faction wins), whilst at the same time subtly trying to hinder each other (to cut down the competion for the Best Admiral spot for their faction). Got to love it when internal backstabbing starts breaking apart a faction

No, I actually don't believe having players play both sides would make for particularly compelling event play.

As I stated above limiting mirror matches only further the variables you can expect to encounter. It really only limits variety.

It's a terrible idea and thankfully will never happen. Gameplay trumps fluff.

I can't be the only one with the imagination to do this right?

Blue on blue fight is simple. Oh look, that pesky Corellian Navy and their Nebulon-B's and CR90's are attacking my Rebel fleet!

Oh no! Warlord Zinj is making a run for my territory and has deployed his Victory's and Gladiators!

Come on guys, even in X-Wing it works.

Oh look, Hapan X-Wing's vs my Alliance X-Wings

If I want to see the movies, i'll see the movies, I come here for an interesting game and mirror matches are part of that.

Training exercise in a simulator. Best way to know your side's weakness is to fight against it.

War Games for the Emperors Cup or Rebels Ring.

All forces practice against themselves, time honored tradition of war games, "Do you want to play a game?"