I LOVE going first. Being first player means the ball is in my court and I get to decide what is going to happen, because honestly, player 2 is always just reacting to what you are doing and trying to take that strength away from you. That's why they get the objectives.

I see where you're coming from: I just disagree. Certain objectives completely put the ball in player 2's court. Contested Outpost, for example, forces player 1 to come to a certain spot and engage player 2 as they see fit. Superior Positions let's player 2 completely counter player 1's setup and get ready to fight him exactly how he wishes. Dangerous Territory...you get the picture, I'm sure.

The advantage of player 1 is simply acting first each round...which is massive in a "shoot, then move" game with alternating turns. However, let's not fool ourselves into thinking player 1 controls the game...cuz they simply don't. Most examples show the opposite imo.

I feel like they won't do it, but the Assault Frigate mk 1 would be lovely in that styling.

Pretty sure that's a Nebulon Mark Two. The Assault Frigate mark 1 looks more like a torpedo. Modified Neb here: http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Nebulon-B2_frigate

I LOVE going first. Being first player means the ball is in my court and I get to decide what is going to happen, because honestly, player 2 is always just reacting to what you are doing and trying to take that strength away from you. That's why they get the objectives.

Except after you have moved, he is like the first player to the rest of our ships.

I like that we can debate this topic until some place hot freezes over. If we ever had a concensus on going first it would mean it some how matters.

What they didn't show that had the Corvette gone first or second some one was in trouble.

I LOVE going first. Being first player means the ball is in my court and I get to decide what is going to happen, because honestly, player 2 is always just reacting to what you are doing and trying to take that strength away from you. That's why they get the objectives.

I see where you're coming from: I just disagree. Certain objectives completely put the ball in player 2's court. Contested Outpost, for example, forces player 1 to come to a certain spot and engage player 2 as they see fit. Superior Positions let's player 2 completely counter player 1's setup and get ready to fight him exactly how he wishes. Dangerous Territory...you get the picture, I'm sure.

The advantage of player 1 is simply acting first each round...which is massive in a "shoot, then move" game with alternating turns. However, let's not fool ourselves into thinking player 1 controls the game...cuz they simply don't. Most examples show the opposite imo.

I don't see a single VSD ever taking on 6 CR90's ~_^

I don't think that the ability to debate this constantly means that it does not matter. I think that they share equal importance and affect how one builds their list and plays the game. Take me for instance, I play better when I am first player.

I have yet to see Contested Outpost net a gain though. You limit yourself to a geographical location on the board and then within 2 to 3 turns you limit yourself in a direction. Then you are there getting 2 to 3 tokens at best. . . Those are just my experiences though.

Superior Positions is so much fun! I love having everything set up and not caring what they do. I am still making them react solely to my deployment. Same with Fleet Ambush.

I would highly recommend you listen to Intensify Forward Firepower episode 7.

I don't see a single VSD ever taking on 6 CR90's ~_^

The VSD went first and ended up there after he finished his shooting, he delt 2 damage to the front shield of the lead Corvette. Also, if you look each corvette has taken 2 damage to their fron shields, the drove by the other VSD that is off screen.

I LOVE going first. Being first player means the ball is in my court and I get to decide what is going to happen, because honestly, player 2 is always just reacting to what you are doing and trying to take that strength away from you. That's why they get the objectives.

Except after you have moved, he is like the first player to the rest of our ships.

I like that we can debate this topic until some place hot freezes over. If we ever had a concensus on going first it would mean it some how matters.

What they didn't show that had the Corvette gone first or second some one was in trouble.

I LOVE going first. Being first player means the ball is in my court and I get to decide what is going to happen, because honestly, player 2 is always just reacting to what you are doing and trying to take that strength away from you. That's why they get the objectives.

I see where you're coming from: I just disagree. Certain objectives completely put the ball in player 2's court. Contested Outpost, for example, forces player 1 to come to a certain spot and engage player 2 as they see fit. Superior Positions let's player 2 completely counter player 1's setup and get ready to fight him exactly how he wishes. Dangerous Territory...you get the picture, I'm sure.

The advantage of player 1 is simply acting first each round...which is massive in a "shoot, then move" game with alternating turns. However, let's not fool ourselves into thinking player 1 controls the game...cuz they simply don't. Most examples show the opposite imo.

I don't see a single VSD ever taking on 6 CR90's ~_^

I don't think that the ability to debate this constantly means that it does not matter. I think that they share equal importance and affect how one builds their list and plays the game. Take me for instance, I play better when I am first player.

I have yet to see Contested Outpost net a gain though. You limit yourself to a geographical location on the board and then within 2 to 3 turns you limit yourself in a direction. Then you are there getting 2 to 3 tokens at best. . . Those are just my experiences though.

Superior Positions is so much fun! I love having everything set up and not caring what they do. I am still making them react solely to my deployment. Same with Fleet Ambush.

I would highly recommend you listen to Intensify Forward Firepower episode 7.

Interesting...as I built my list, with no internet feedback, to do exactly what you're claiming with the understanding that at 298/299/300 points I'd rarely get bid and likely go second...of course now we know it's likely i'll go first since people are bidding for second now.

My intention is to run my list with as many options as possible and use my skill to win all my games: divorcing myself from first player, second player, certain other lists not countering mine, etc.

So we seem to be coming to the similar conclusions: do what I want and use my skill, yet I don't see first/second player being a big contributing factor to this.

I low ball to guarenteed spot at first. I want first because no matter what side I play, I get to determine the engagement.

I can jink a combat and have done so to other players. I have had them assume a combat was going to occur and then slow down so that they waster their precious well timed command.

It hurts precise players the most but once that damage is done they hare life.

Now, Contested outpost is an interesting one, giving it to your opponent. . . Ohhhhh tricky and I like it. It is a subtle way to take away at least a ship from combat. . . Hmmmm.

Well it depends on the person. I am very good at getting people to go after what I want. If I go first then I am dictating that almost all game. If I go second I have to make them give up that. I either have to be conservative in my play and make them come to me or I have to focus on my bonus. Now I can do all the things that 1st player can but 1st player has the psychological leg up already. They decide the engagements and I do t just mean squadrons, I mean where combat in general will occur

I feel like they won't do it, but the Assault Frigate mk 1 would be lovely in that styling.

Pretty sure that's a Nebulon Mark Two. The Assault Frigate mark 1 looks more like a torpedo. Modified Neb here: http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Nebulon-B2_frigate

Are you sure you're not thinking of the Dreadnaught that the Assault Frigate Mk. I was spawned from?

I'm pretty much positive that's an Assault Frigate Mk.I. It's basically a chop-shop Dreadnaught with the flippers of a Nebulon B (or a B2 apparently. I've never seen the B2-style Assault Frigate before, honestly. It's starting to grow on me.) and photoshopped to twice their normal size, then pasted on in a weird imitation of the Nebulon. A real modified frigate has that inverted triangle with a 6 drive core array, but that one has a 'thresher-shark' fin on the back and just 4.

If we were going to see a B2 I'm not going to complain... at all... in any way, shape or form . I love the B2. Still think the Dreadnaught looks a little weird as I'm used to TIE Fighter's interpretation, which is sort of like a mix of CR92 and a DP20. (Goodness knows how ugly that 'murderous wine cork' gunship is).

I don't mind being first or second. There are some lists which benefit greatly from being first (any list with Demolisher for instance), but I don't count on that. I make my build at 300ish points (sometimes there's nothing to add) and choose my objectives carefully. I prefer all-rounder fleets to fleets designed for a specific objective, because the bidding game is a slippery slope that I don't want to take part in for now.

Are you sure you're not thinking of the Dreadnaught that the Assault Frigate Mk. I was spawned from?

I'm pretty much positive that's an Assault Frigate Mk.I. It's basically a chop-shop Dreadnaught with the flippers of a Nebulon B (or a B2 apparently. I've never seen the B2-style Assault Frigate before, honestly. It's starting to grow on me.) and photoshopped to twice their normal size, then pasted on in a weird imitation of the Nebulon. A real modified frigate has that inverted triangle with a 6 drive core array, but that one has a 'thresher-shark' fin on the back and just 4.

That's the version from Starship Battles, as well as Saga Edition's Starships of the Galaxy.

The version with one downward-pointing prow fin instead of two, was in the Heir to the Empire comic, and Star Wars Rebellion.

I am pretty sure Adar Tallon is just as confused about what ship that is as we are!

Edit: also, the exhaust pattern is very wrong for a Nebulon B or B2, but it also doesn't match the Dreadnaught pattern either (4 engines vs 6)

Good spot and glad to hear and learn something new, Ironlord. Would you happen to know if it's just diverging concept art, or if they're a more customized vessel? Just wondering how many iterations they may canonically have: were they something like a mon-cal where no two were exactly the same, or mass produced a la the Star Destroyer. The K... khx... Khira... that new Scum faction K-fighter-thing has, what, 6 official 'models' for its supposed production line? I was wondering if Mk.I's were similar.

-laughs- also very very true Megamen. I looked at the Dreadnaught too and saw its engine patter.... where did this quad array come from?

Either way, they're cool images. Anyone happen to know if they're from other source material, or maybe something of a preview for new work in the pipeline? I haven't been aboard with FFG as long as some, so I don't know their practices for this sort of stuff.

As others have mentioned, I'm excited for the potential spoilers in the concept art, but this article would have been much more helpful two to three months ago. Hopefully they catch up quick. I find when I go Imperials it helps to have Initiative to prevent Rebel ships from "double tapping", going last and then going first. But, I'm far from an expert.

I think there are advantages to being either first or second. the fact that we debate it means that there is not always one right answer and that is a good thing.

Going first lets you dictate tempo, and battle rhythm, as well as target priority, to a lesser degree. it lets you dictate the timing of engagements in many situations as well.

When you go second, you know that one of your objectives is going to be what is being used, and you can plan for that, and build for that. Intel sweep with a corevette swarm is the best example I can think of. this is also a huge advantage.

If this game is well balanced, there should not always be a decisive advantage to being first or second, and there does not seem to be. balance is good.

I low ball to guarenteed spot at first. I want first because no matter what side I play, I get to determine the engagement.

I can jink a combat and have done so to other players. I have had them assume a combat was going to occur and then slow down so that they waster their precious well timed command.

It hurts precise players the most but once that damage is done they hare life.

Now, Contested outpost is an interesting one, giving it to your opponent. . . Ohhhhh tricky and I like it. It is a subtle way to take away at least a ship from combat. . . Hmmmm.

Well it depends on the person. I am very good at getting people to go after what I want. If I go first then I am dictating that almost all game. If I go second I have to make them give up that. I either have to be conservative in my play and make them come to me or I have to focus on my bonus. Now I can do all the things that 1st player can but 1st player has the psychological leg up already. They decide the engagements and I do t just mean squadrons, I mean where combat in general will occur

Perhaps my tendency to not dwell too much on what others are doing is translating into a strength in Armada...most other games it punishes me: namely X-Wing. However, your point of trying to mess up second player due to your movements as first doesn't seem to translate to my games or how I play. Interesting to consider imo.

I do agree of the dangers of Contested Outpost for player 2. My tournament game that had it let me delete a victory before the other even had a chance to engage. This particular objective really complicates player 2's defense due to allowing player 1 to focus his power on one flank or the other, and ships being less responsive to turning and engaging that flank without banging into each other...at least for imperials.

I'm also curious how much investment you put into squadrons. The distances involved mean that it's hard for you to psych up an engagement when it's trivial for imps to push squadrons directly into your formation on turn two with a squad command. This often ties my hands on forcing me to squad command on my ship(s) turn 2 to get a favorable position during that turn and turn 3.

I think there are advantages to being either first or second. the fact that we debate it means that there is not always one right answer and that is a good thing.

Going first lets you dictate tempo, and battle rhythm, as well as target priority, to a lesser degree. it lets you dictate the timing of engagements in many situations as well.

When you go second, you know that one of your objectives is going to be what is being used, and you can plan for that, and build for that. Intel sweep with a corevette swarm is the best example I can think of. this is also a huge advantage.

If this game is well balanced, there should not always be a decisive advantage to being first or second, and there does not seem to be. balance is good.

This. Armada is so well balanced it's insane imo. It'll only get better at 400pts with wave 2.

I low ball to guarenteed spot at first. I want first because no matter what side I play, I get to determine the engagement.

I can jink a combat and have done so to other players. I have had them assume a combat was going to occur and then slow down so that they waster their precious well timed command.

It hurts precise players the most but once that damage is done they hare life.

Now, Contested outpost is an interesting one, giving it to your opponent. . . Ohhhhh tricky and I like it. It is a subtle way to take away at least a ship from combat. . . Hmmmm.

Well it depends on the person. I am very good at getting people to go after what I want. If I go first then I am dictating that almost all game. If I go second I have to make them give up that. I either have to be conservative in my play and make them come to me or I have to focus on my bonus. Now I can do all the things that 1st player can but 1st player has the psychological leg up already. They decide the engagements and I do t just mean squadrons, I mean where combat in general will occur

Perhaps my tendency to not dwell too much on what others are doing is translating into a strength in Armada...most other games it punishes me: namely X-Wing. However, your point of trying to mess up second player due to your movements as first doesn't seem to translate to my games or how I play. Interesting to consider imo.

I do agree of the dangers of Contested Outpost for player 2. My tournament game that had it let me delete a victory before the other even had a chance to engage. This particular objective really complicates player 2's defense due to allowing player 1 to focus his power on one flank or the other, and ships being less responsive to turning and engaging that flank without banging into each other...at least for imperials.

I'm also curious how much investment you put into squadrons. The distances involved mean that it's hard for you to psych up an engagement when it's trivial for imps to push squadrons directly into your formation on turn two with a squad command. This often ties my hands on forcing me to squad command on my ship(s) turn 2 to get a favorable position during that turn and turn 3.

I like to mess with people in this game. It is fun having that power by just going first.

I don't invest much into squadrons usually. While they seem good I usually have 2-4 squadrons to interfer with squadrons of my foe.

It's a nice article for new(er) players.

I didn't really get anything out of it, I've all but shelved the game until Wave 2 spoilers hit. There is ZERO point in practicing for worlds when you've already got 300 "figured out" and you know nothing about Wave 2.

It's a nice article for new(er) players.

I didn't really get anything out of it, I've all but shelved the game until Wave 2 spoilers hit. There is ZERO point in practicing for worlds when you've already got 300 "figured out" and you know nothing about Wave 2.

It's a nice article for new(er) players.

I didn't really get anything out of it, I've all but shelved the game until Wave 2 spoilers hit. There is ZERO point in practicing for worlds when you've already got 300 "figured out" and you know nothing about Wave 2.

I can almost guarantee that you don't have 300 pts "figured" out. I have dozens of games in at 300 pts and I don't have this game figured out. The game is never the same. Oh some tactics are the same, keep the neb's sides from the enemy, keep at high speeds with the CR90, but there are so many tactical exceptions in this game that they can't be mapped

Our group has played dozens upon dozens of games, tournament after tournament, and we've found the builds that are simply hands down better. There is no "best list" but I've played enough games with and against the best lists plural that at this point it's simply an exercise in maneuvering and remembering what to do. I'm going to worlds in November, and there really isn't a point in practicing yet because the Armada post wave 2 is not the Armada everyone is playing right now. As soon as they drop spoilers I'll start proxying, but until then IMO practicing this meta doesn't have a point when I can still consistently perform well at 300.

Going first lets you dictate tempo, and battle rhythm, as well as target priority, to a lesser degree. it lets you dictate the timing of engagements in many situations as well.

Tempo in fencing is the speed at which you move your feet, you can start very slow then accelerate and finish fast, you can start slow, go fast then slow down again. Quite often too you add in hand work that is counter to the cadience of the foot work. Perhaps your feet go slow but your hand moves fast to perform a preparation of attack.

As such I think Lyraeus has the use of tempo quite right, perhaps the GSD starts at speed 3 and then just as it almost gets into range it drops to speed 1 and allows the other ship to drift into range without firing. Then watches as your ships next few turns are done all muddled with respect to command usage. Some of the rebel ships can perform some pretty nice side slips that can keep them at range for a turn more.

As such I would argue that the first player controls the tempo for being first, to play with tempo you may need to play with your ships speed or use their maneuverability to control distance to opposing ships. VSD probably will have little control over tempo, the Neb/GSD will have some and the Corvette will be the master. As such for the most part the rebels control when, where and how the fight starts.

Timing of engagement tends to go more with the player with the most ships, or perhaps the most ships in a place to move without undue disadvantage for moving. Again this can be engineered through tactical play. I seem to find my opponent gets to just out of long range one turn. Then as he often takes just 2 ships ends up moving that ship first into range of my ships or it moves second after just one of my ships and I get a pretty good alpha strike. As you start getting equal ship counts then this starts to change a bit, but again at this time the faster maneuverable ships tend to be better able to control the timing of the engagement.

That said a speed 2 VSD with a maneuver command is a dangerous beast. That extra yaw and slow to speed 1 can take you by surprise and complete lay to waste a well planned change of tempo of your own.

I do kind of agree on the futile feeling of wave 1 with 300 points limit when we know its going to 400 and adding a ton of new options. Thougj I feel the knowledge of the game is completely divorced from points values and such...learning how to employ tactics and manuevers to your play will help at 3, 4 or 9 hundred poont games.

It's a nice article for new(er) players.

I didn't really get anything out of it, I've all but shelved the game until Wave 2 spoilers hit. There is ZERO point in practicing for worlds when you've already got 300 "figured out" and you know nothing about Wave 2.

I can almost guarantee that you don't have 300 pts "figured" out. I have dozens of games in at 300 pts and I don't have this game figured out. The game is never the same. Oh some tactics are the same, keep the neb's sides from the enemy, keep at high speeds with the CR90, but there are so many tactical exceptions in this game that they can't be mapped

Our group has played dozens upon dozens of games, tournament after tournament, and we've found the builds that are simply hands down better. There is no "best list" but I've played enough games with and against the best lists plural that at this point it's simply an exercise in maneuvering and remembering what to do. I'm going to worlds in November, and there really isn't a point in practicing yet because the Armada post wave 2 is not the Armada everyone is playing right now. As soon as they drop spoilers I'll start proxying, but until then IMO practicing this meta doesn't have a point when I can still consistently perform well at 300.

Amanal portrayed my thoughts beautifully!

@Bitharne, I think that tactics shift at higher points. Less goes on Objectives and more on killing.

I sure hope they add objectives as they go. Especially ones that would take advantage of the larger fleets.

Amanal portrayed my thoughts beautifully!

@Bitharne, I think that tactics shift at higher points. Less goes on Objectives and more on killing.

Objectives become less important at higher points? Odd cuz your podcast guys claimed the opposite. I'm ambivalent, I just know the game will only get exponentially better at 400 pts.