Any idea why ships must attack first, then move, and don't have the option to move first, then attack? Just curious . . . that's one element I'd like to see added/altered.

Game would be too easy if you could choose, and I love the way it is currently as opposed to move then shoot, your welcome to house rule it of course.

I REALLY WOULDN'T house rule it!

In the same way that it would be possible, but a bad idea to allow you to fire from all four arcs each turn.

Why would it allow you to fire from all four arcs? The same attack limitations would be in place (two attacks from different hull zones), right?

Star Wars battles were actually modelled after World War II engagements. They are futuristic because of sci-fi tech like hyperdrives and turbolasers but at the same time, they use low-tech, analog controls and interfaces. Think of Armada capital ships as World War II battleships that need to slow down or stop in order to aim their guns correctly. If you prefer fast-paced games with responsive units, you should try X-Wing. It's a great game that might suit your preferences better.

Why would it allow you to fire from all four arcs? The same attack limitations would be in place (two attacks from different hull zones), right?

Why would you fire then move, because the rules were designed with/for this sequence.

A lot of thought went into the design and it works...

Moving before firing would change the dynamic of the game. Currently we have an upgrade that allows this to an extent and many have seen what it does.

The issue I see with move then shoot is that the games would no longer feel like they do. Ships like the Victory would not feel like the tanks they currently are. For me this feeling of diversity males the game fun.

Play a many more games, you will get used to it.

My point of reference is Star Wars Miniatures, the Wizards of the Coast game produced in the 2000s. There, your figures (and yes, it was people, not ships, so it was different) could either move/shoot, shoot/move, or move (at double speed) without shooting. That rule made for lots of fun game play. I'm not saying it should therefore be included in every miniatures game, but I was curious why this one chose to restrict it to one technique only.

Well it would make sense for that on ground based games.

Remember in the star wars universe, they have to aim those giant cannons and shoot them. On ground they are doing so much less by bringing up blasters, vitro blades, etc.

Think of your shooting during the start of your turn as when they have set up that shot from last turn if that will help you.

Trust me, it takes some getting used to but the shooting and moving rules are not going anywhere. They have the game well balanced there and it makes sense. It also differs from most all other space based games out there which I find is a great thing.

Now for moving, you should read the Lost Fleet series. It goes into a lot of space combat and how things works. Now while it is for our universes physics, it does help one understand why turning in space takes so much.

Or you can go look at a speeding car making a turn safely (no burn outs or flips), remember that more mass and speed means more weight being shifted. Where a car would roll out from trying to turn so sharply, all that mass in a ship like the CR90 or Victory would tear the ship apart.

If you could move and shoot in any order you chose Armada would be a quicker game since it would permit higher quality shots and make it more likely that you'll get shots from two arcs on a single target.

Allowing shots before or after also removes that benefit that a good player can gain by making sure his ships end the turn sitting in as few arcs as possible or while having shots from multiple hull zones of his own as well as avoiding unfavorable range bands. The current system also allows a player to create dilemas for their opponent when it comes to determining activation order. Do you activate the ship that has great shots lined up or the one that is about to get unloaded on?

Allowing a unit to shoot any order changes the skill needed to play this game, currently the game rewards players that can setup favorable situations in advance. If they changed it the game would become much more reactive.

All of that is a concious design choice by the designers. Being able to take a single shot after moving is an advantage that they valued at 10 points for the Gladiator. Across their Star Wars Miniature games FFG switches up the order in which players move and attack to create a different feel and pacing for each game. Armada attacks and then moves and X-Wing moves and then attacks. Imperial Assault has a turn order similar to what you describe the old SW Miniatures game having. Each model gets two actions a round and can be split between attacks, movement, and special actions a model may have in any order you'd like. Taking the movement action gives movement points that don't even need to be spent all at one time. This lets a model move from cover, shoot, and then return to cover.

Being able to shoot and/or move in either order (or even to just shoot after moving) reduces the importance of prior planning and careful maneuvering, and makes it much easier to concentrate fire. The balance between attacker and defender at any given moment shifts towards the attacker, because it would require little effort in maneuvering to maximize your attack and make defensive maneuvering all but meaningless.

Look at Demolisher (especially with Engine Techs). It may, every round, more-or-less choose the exact geometry of one of it's attacks. With a Navigate command it can choose pretty much any hull zone within distance 4 or so in front of it, and attack that hull zone with any of its own, and it only has to decide immediately before it performs that attack. Although you can threaten it's final position with your own ships and squadrons, and exact retribution once it has attacked, you cannot actually stop it from doing so . This is why it's so popular; it offers more control over your own attacks than anything else in the game, as well as more-or-less ignoring any effort the opponent has put into their defensive maneuvers. Instead of trying to figure out where to move to both minimize the effect of the enemy's attacks and maximize your own in the following round after they have moved; you only have to hold the maneuvering tool over the table and pick what hull zone you want to attack.

Now imagine that ability on every ship. Every activation, every ship can choose what hull zone it would like to attack with it's own hull zones, and more-or-less at the desired range. If you were to allow ships to perform both attacks after moving, every single engagement would be a double-arc barrage on the enemy's most vulnerable hull zone, pretty much regardless of the skill of either player. That's gonna kill most ships in two or three activations at most, and makes all the cool defense token and command dial mechanics (as well as critical hits) pretty much worthless; since you get to throw all of your possible dice pretty much every turn, the only serious factor is how many dice you have. The game would be all about alpha strikes, and over pretty rapidly, with minimal planning. Also, squadrons would be pretty much worthless, since right now the biggest thing they offer is the pinpoint anti-ship attacks that other ships cannot perform.

Really, this game is all about planning for the future. Look at the command dial mechanism. Same thing with move/shoot. You have to plan where your opponent will be next turn.

The fact that you have to shoot before you move represents the weight and bulk of these ships. Have you ever piloted a motorized boat, even a slow small rental one ? There is inertia due to mass (and also resistance of water, but like someone else mentionned, Star Wars space battles are modelled on WWII engagements), and the moving after shooting represents the ship continuing with its inertia.

It's not so much as a ship commander says "move forward and then shoot", it is more "go forward, maneuver and shoot along the way". Which is what happens in game, with shooting along the way being shooting in your next turn. As a counterpoint, fighters when order to do so can move and shoot, because they are much faster, nimbler, with smaller guns that are easier to bring to bear.

It is also meant to reward foresight and predicting your opponent's movement. It's not so much killing the opponent where he stands but killing him where he will stand. In addition, move then shoot works better in miniature games where the miniatures can fall back, because you have ways to prevent incoming damage. Due to the limited maneuvrability of the ships and the inertia, shoot then move works well.

To play Armada you just have to get out of the mindset of going for a static opponent that can react to your move, but rather fighting a less mobile opponent and predicting where he will go based on what you know of the ships.

My point of reference is Star Wars Miniatures, the Wizards of the Coast game produced in the 2000s. There, your figures (and yes, it was people, not ships, so it was different) could either move/shoot, shoot/move, or move (at double speed) without shooting. That rule made for lots of fun game play. I'm not saying it should therefore be included in every miniatures game, but I was curious why this one chose to restrict it to one technique only.

Ah, Starship Battles. I owned quite a few ships for that game. The models were cool, but the standard rules were absolutely horrible; they relied waaaay too much on luck and the battles didn't flow well in my opinion. We house-ruled the hell out of that game. Armada is 1000 times better and exactly what I've been looking for in a Star Wars fleet combat game, no alterations needed. I think that the current sequence of Attack then Move makes the game so much more strategic and engaging. Like others have said, it would be too easy the other way around (look at the Demolisher and think if every ship could do that). Fortunately, I was able to get a good amount of money from my Starship Battles miniatures and buy Armada

P.S. The Star War Miniatures game that Starship Battles was a spin-off of was much better in terms of balance and gameplay, and I still collect them to this day

tossing my hat in with Joker the 2nd

the order of the rules is to emphasis forward thinking and planning, which is kind of the greatest emphasis in Armada (just look at the command dial)

it also makes Squadrons all the more potent despite their restrictions, because they can move and then shoot when issued the relevant command

I think aswell it is to seperate itself from X-Wing. Otherwise Corvettes would just be X-wing style fighters with 2 shots.

It represents that even the smallest capital ship in the game is hundreds (well 150) of metres long and thousands of tonnes of plasteel and takes some prior planning to fight effectively.

forget about star wars lore, next people will be complaining that its played on a flat surface. "space isn't flat, this game is not realistic" people are so stupid. If you don't like it don't play it. I think this is a beautiful game with great rules, thank you fantasy fight for the hours of fun you provided me and my family.