Hi, as you could see on GenCon the Squadrons that should be an important part of this game are not being used and I think that is cause the actual rules. Their limitation of move or shoot make that they completly depend of Capital ships and if your opponent play more capital ships and focus yours you will end with all your squadrons running after the capital ships and doing no real damage.

To avoid this kind of situation and to make the squadrons become more playable I want to give some idea that could work and will fix this avoiding to buff too much the squadrons.

My idea is that the squadrons make some kind of "engage" to capital ships too, but far different from squadrons "engage":

- If an squadron is on distance 1 from any enemy capital ship AND is NOT engaged with enemy squadrons can "follow" this capital ship.

- With "follow" you can make what you want, but the important is to give some "free" movement to follow the enemy capital ships once they engaged them. For me the ideal movement will be that the squadrons move maintaining their actual position respectively to the capital ship (if they were on the back of the capital ship before it move they should stay after capital movement on its back, if they were in front they stay in front...)

This could make that people start to use them more.

I think we need to wait until we're able to bring 400 points to the table before thinking of ways to change the mechanics of the game. The game was designed for 400 points, and since we're only playing at 300 points right now, it stands to reason that we aren't getting the full experience as intended/playtested.

That would be a nice card effect---squadrons = to your command value can key word 'follow'.

I think another card that might help with squadrons is to extend the command range to the full distance ruler for a ship that has it equipped. Make it kind of costly so it's not just autoinclude on every ship.

Hi, as you could see on GenCon the Squadrons that should be an important part of this game are not being used and I think that is cause the actual rules. Their limitation of move or shoot make that they completly depend of Capital ships and if your opponent play more capital ships and focus yours you will end with all your squadrons running after the capital ships and doing no real damage.

To avoid this kind of situation and to make the squadrons become more playable I want to give some idea that could work and will fix this avoiding to buff too much the squadrons.

My idea is that the squadrons make some kind of "engage" to capital ships too, but far different from squadrons "engage":

- If an squadron is on distance 1 from any enemy capital ship AND is NOT engaged with enemy squadrons can "follow" this capital ship.

- With "follow" you can make what you want, but the important is to give some "free" movement to follow the enemy capital ships once they engaged them. For me the ideal movement will be that the squadrons move maintaining their actual position respectively to the capital ship (if they were on the back of the capital ship before it move they should stay after capital movement on its back, if they were in front they stay in front...)

This could make that people start to use them more.

Armada is a game of capital ships with fighters, not fighters with capital ships. Squadrons will always be secondary, and the fact that you can make forces without them is a feature, not a bug.

Also, we will be getting fighters in Wave 2 with Rogue, and even better ability, that lets you move and activate in the squadron phase, no command needed.

I think we need to wait until we're able to bring 400 points to the table before thinking of ways to change the mechanics of the game. The game was designed for 400 points, and since we're only playing at 300 points right now, it stands to reason that we aren't getting the full experience as intended/playtested.

Wait? I've been playing at 400 points since day one. I think I only played 180 once, and 300 at a tourney. Aside from that it's all been 400. When wave two comes up I'm going to 700+

Hi, as you could see on GenCon the Squadrons that should be an important part of this game are not being used and I think that is cause the actual rules. Their limitation of move or shoot make that they completly depend of Capital ships and if your opponent play more capital ships and focus yours you will end with all your squadrons running after the capital ships and doing no real damage.

To avoid this kind of situation and to make the squadrons become more playable I want to give some idea that could work and will fix this avoiding to buff too much the squadrons.

My idea is that the squadrons make some kind of "engage" to capital ships too, but far different from squadrons "engage":

- If an squadron is on distance 1 from any enemy capital ship AND is NOT engaged with enemy squadrons can "follow" this capital ship.

- With "follow" you can make what you want, but the important is to give some "free" movement to follow the enemy capital ships once they engaged them. For me the ideal movement will be that the squadrons move maintaining their actual position respectively to the capital ship (if they were on the back of the capital ship before it move they should stay after capital movement on its back, if they were in front they stay in front...)

This could make that people start to use them more.

Armada is a game of capital ships with fighters, not fighters with capital ships. Squadrons will always be secondary, and the fact that you can make forces without them is a feature, not a bug.

Being able to win easyly with no fighters in your force at a tourney is a "bug" maybe not with the game rules but with the tourney scoring system. a mixed force should be harder to beat then one with no fighters.

Hi, as you could see on GenCon the Squadrons that should be an important part of this game are not being used and I think that is cause the actual rules. Their limitation of move or shoot make that they completly depend of Capital ships and if your opponent play more capital ships and focus yours you will end with all your squadrons running after the capital ships and doing no real damage.

To avoid this kind of situation and to make the squadrons become more playable I want to give some idea that could work and will fix this avoiding to buff too much the squadrons.

My idea is that the squadrons make some kind of "engage" to capital ships too, but far different from squadrons "engage":

- If an squadron is on distance 1 from any enemy capital ship AND is NOT engaged with enemy squadrons can "follow" this capital ship.

- With "follow" you can make what you want, but the important is to give some "free" movement to follow the enemy capital ships once they engaged them. For me the ideal movement will be that the squadrons move maintaining their actual position respectively to the capital ship (if they were on the back of the capital ship before it move they should stay after capital movement on its back, if they were in front they stay in front...)

This could make that people start to use them more.

Armada is a game of capital ships with fighters, not fighters with capital ships. Squadrons will always be secondary, and the fact that you can make forces without them is a feature, not a bug.

Thus why the winners of nationals put those things away like a concussion missile from X-wing miniatures. Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the top 4 squadron-less lists? Only the top player brough an all capital build but one thing that he noted is that in a 200/100 point vs a 300/0 point list the 300 point only needs to destroy 200 points to table the opponent.

Sure Armada might be capital ships with fighters but all the space battle scenes in Star Wars the original trilogy were Star Fighters with capital ships save for the first scene but that was a little unfair. The capital ships can still fight but they also launched fighters and the fighters could do some serious damage. It was a squadron of A-wings that dealt the deathblow to the executor after all.

So this is the BIG problem with Star Wars Armada miniatures, I am not getting the Star Wars vibe from the mechanics. Instead I can only look at Armada like a Star Trek miniatures game in the parts of the theme that is supported by its game play mechanics. Now that being said Armada is a way better Star Trek miniatures game than Star Trek Attack Wing but it clearly isn't the better Star Wars game when it comes to Star Wars space combat.

Marinealver, you are wrong 2nd place had 38 points of squadrons. 2 A-Wings and Tycho

Thus why the winners of nationals put those things away like a concussion missile from X-wing miniatures. Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the top 4 squadron-less lists?

Sure Armada might be capital ships with fighters but all the space battle scenes in Star Wars the original trilogy were Star Fighters with capital ships save for the first scene but that was a little unfair. The capital ships can still fight but they also launched fighters and the fighters could do some serious damage. It was a squadron of A-wings that dealt the deathblow to the executor after all.

So this is the BIG problem with Star Wars Armada miniatures, I am not getting the Star Wars vibe from the mechanics. Instead I can only look at Armada like a Star Trek miniatures game in the parts of the theme that is supported by its game play mechanics. Now that being said Armada is a way better Star Trek miniatures game than Star Trek Attack Wing but it clearly isn't the better Star Wars game when it comes to Star Wars space combat.

You mean all one of them? There were no capital ships in the battle at the end of ANH. ESB was nearly all capital ships (the fighters were only there as escorts). That leaves ROTJ. And, as Lyraeus said, the second-place finisher had squadrons.

I switched over to 400 points some 4 or 5 games ago, we will not go below that anymore. While taking considerable amount of fighters in 300 points is close to suicidal, it's very different in 400 points. If Wave 2 brings more goodies for fighters then I expect to see some fighters in every list (even if a few only, for counter-mission only).

I think with 400 points, 4 ship builds will be the norm with fighter support.

Everyone is complaining about the lack of fighters at Nationals but no one is looking at the why. Those that did bring squadrons did not do well or could not push the damage fast enough to win. That is from lack of experience or their fighters got tied up by a couple of fighters.

When people get more experienced points will start dropping, we will see fewer 10-0 wins and at that time fighters will shine.

Marinealver, you are wrong 2nd place had 38 points of squadrons. 2 A-Wings and Tycho

Thanks but it is hard to find the tournament results for anything other than the 1st place list.

Still as I said before Armada seems more like a Star Trek game than a Star Wars game, at least it is better than Star trek Attack Wing.

Also I would like to note the casual attitude of the top players. I honestly don't think Armada will have much of a competitive scene. That being said making armada a casual game is not a bad thing but it definitely will not compete with X-wing on competitive play.

I'm still hoping that we'll get an "aces" pack of semi-unique fighters that use the same miniatures. I think it'd be great if we could get, for example, "Rogue Squadron" versions of all the rebel fighters that are identical to their basic profiles but all with the rogue keyword for fluffy reasons (and maybe have a 0-2 type cap of each fighter)

Probably not as competitive as xwing... but im ok with that.

Honestly, I'd rather the game have a more casual feel than a competitive feel (this is my personal taste). Right now, squadrons aren't the optimal choice, but I love seeing them on the table and i often bring them regardless of them being less than optimal.

I'm still hoping that we'll get an "aces" pack of semi-unique fighters that use the same miniatures. I think it'd be great if we could get, for example, "Rogue Squadron" versions of all the rebel fighters that are identical to their basic profiles but all with the rogue keyword for fluffy reasons (and maybe have a 0-2 type cap of each fighter)

I imagine something like that will happen at some point. I think they will get capabilities that enhance the inclusion of squadrons.

Marinealver, you are wrong 2nd place had 38 points of squadrons. 2 A-Wings and Tycho

Thanks but it is hard to find the tournament results for anything other than the 1st place list.

Still as I said before Armada seems more like a Star Trek game than a Star Wars game, at least it is better than Star trek Attack Wing.

Also I would like to note the casual attitude of the top players. I honestly don't think Armada will have much of a competitive scene. That being said making armada a casual game is not a bad thing but it definitely will not compete with X-wing on competitive play.

Here is 2nd places after action report, 1st place also posted one up.

Relaxed attitude? Go play a tournment. I finished one Saturday and I can tell you we may be relaxed out of game but we are pretty tense in game. I can't make World's this year but my goal is world's next year. Oh btw, I am insulted by the way you said that. Armada will have a huge tournament scene. Most likely bigger than IA.

DUR, I am expecting one likely wave 4. Wave 3 might be things like the Defender and such.

The game is 2/3rd out. One should not pass judgement until it is at its true release.

Marinealver, you are wrong 2nd place had 38 points of squadrons. 2 A-Wings and Tycho

Thanks but it is hard to find the tournament results for anything other than the 1st place list.

Still as I said before Armada seems more like a Star Trek game than a Star Wars game, at least it is better than Star trek Attack Wing.

Also I would like to note the casual attitude of the top players. I honestly don't think Armada will have much of a competitive scene. That being said making armada a casual game is not a bad thing but it definitely will not compete with X-wing on competitive play.

Here is 2nd places after action report, 1st place also posted one up.

Relaxed attitude? Go play a tournment. I finished one Saturday and I can tell you we may be relaxed out of game but we are pretty tense in game. I can't make World's this year but my goal is world's next year. Oh btw, I am insulted by the way you said that. Armada will have a huge tournament scene. Most likely bigger than IA.

DUR, I am expecting one likely wave 4. Wave 3 might be things like the Defender and such.

The game is 2/3rd out. One should not pass judgement until it is at its true release.

It is released, there is just segregated point creep built into the first 2 expansion waves. Now will the game be different after another 100 point is added on to standard. I will say this that the only change for sure is the cost of entry to Armada will be higher. But it just seems to be going the more casual approach.

As for it being bigger than IA well IA is still Star Wars themed Descent first and IA competitive skirmish second, that places a whole new lever of constraints on competitive game play with the scale and everything (note: that general Veers is in a AT-ST). However I didn't say it would be smaller than IA I just said that it will not be as strong as X-wing, now that is not to say that it won't have a large competitive scene as X-wing has rapidly grown into the 2nd largest miniatures game in the US and it has a 3 year lead on Armada. But still as far as Star wars space theme goes, I still say Armada is better as a Star Trek game than as a Star Wars game.

I think you are wrong. At 400 posts this game feels beefy. Right now 4 ships non Corvette builds are hanging out without squadrons.

Let's look at it shall we, we are at 300 points out of 400 that is the first 2/3rds, the next is we only have 2 ship base sizes out of 3, next we are missing what they had planned from the get go and have been play resting this entire time because this games complexity and balance are tier 1.

We have yet to see what the true game is, oh we have glimpses and they are teasing us but until wave 2 hits we are missing so very much.

You see FFG is smart. They figured out that we can stress test their game for them as they make sure to bring in the full game. Bit by bit they are doing so, watching to see how things turn out.

As for "casual approach" I am not sure I see what you mean. Care to elaborate?

Guys, everyone relax. We're still only playing with wave 1. That's not even playing with half a game. Wait and see what wave 2, 3, etc brings before we decide we need to tweak the rules.

Rather than just having new rules, I'd rather see new upgrade and/or fleet commander cards that let you bend the current ones.

I switched over to 400 points some 4 or 5 games ago, we will not go below that anymore. While taking considerable amount of fighters in 300 points is close to suicidal, it's very different in 400 points. If Wave 2 brings more goodies for fighters then I expect to see some fighters in every list (even if a few only, for counter-mission only).

I'm inclined to agree with this, as I've written elsewhere. To test this theory, I took the winning list from the Gen Con tournament--which already has tremendous damage output--and added an additional 100 points in squadrons/squadron support. Basically, you can add an 8-black-dice-Rhymer-ball to that fleet, plus squadron-specific upgrades, if you were at all inclined (Chiraneau + Corruptor + 4 point bid to neutralize the current token 2 A-wing/Tycho builds?) or more ship upgrades. Or, you know, add Boba Fett or something...

Maybe your opponent stays with an all-ship build and spends his 100 points to add one or two more. Maybe you have to spend squadron commands to make it work optimally (although if you park that thing in the center of the map, worst-case scenario it's a huge area-denial tool). Is that worth having the equivalent of 2 GSD side-arcs worth of black dice (averaging 7.25 damage per round if you can bring the whole ball to bear)... at medium range ... on top of the raw damage output from the three Glads and Vic I? Wouldn't you at least think about it? If you're running an all-ship build, don't you need to at least think about how to counter that?

And that's the point. With 300 points, you get only two ships with that Rhymer ball, even if you drop Screed, Demolisher, and ACMs (and really, why would you ever do that?). You can stretch it to three if you half the Rhymer ball, but what's the point? Now you're at a ship disadvantage (down one glad) and a dice disadvantage (4 black dice from squadrons, but can only fire once, versus two potential attacks from a GSD). Taking the extra ship just makes more sense. At 400 points, I can have four ships plus that fighter presence. With eight squadrons, all with the potential to roll medium-range black dice, it's more than a nuisance for your opponent. How does an all-ship build deal with it? Up your ship count (diminishing returns?) and run four glad IIs or Neb-B escorts at it? The moment those ships are in anti-squadron range, they're eating black dice... and at five health a piece, that's two solid rounds of black dice at least. Maybe a token fighter screen can tie it up... until Vader eats it alive (and that's assuming Chiraneau + Corruptor isn't on the list). Avoid it? Even if it never moves, that's a huge area of available space that your opponent has forfeited outright, making it even easier to tell where you should divert your four (four!) ships (assuming the Rhymer ball actually, you know, stays stationary, instead of moving at speed 4/5).

The only other way to deal with it is some sort of dedicated fighter force... and at that point, we've turned the corner, right?

First off I am firmly in the "wait and see" crowd. I want to see what effects Wave 2, and maybe 3, have on the squadron game before I get too worried. We don't know what sorts of abilities may be on some of the unknown ship, squadron and upgrade cards.

I see the current logic being something like this. If you destroy all of the Ships then the unsupported Squadrons have no home to return to so they are effectively destroyed. This makes sense, particularly with any non-hyperdrive capable Squadrons. This gives rise to the "tournament bug," as I have heard some call it. A fleet of 200-points of ships only has to lose those Ships to give the opponent 300 victory points. By using points to buy squadrons you are reducing the number of Ships the other guy has to destroy in order to table you. A quick fix would be to simply change the rule so that a tabling requires that all units, Ships AND Squadrons, have to be eliminated in order to win the game. That may not completely change the strategic view of all players but it would get rid of one of the disincentives.

I do not favor the idea of forcing players include Squadrons in their lists by imposing something like a 200/100 purchase scheme (you get 200 points for Ships and 100 points for Squadrons). Something like that might work for casual home games but it would alienate competitive tournament players.

But again I reiterate that I think waiting to see what future releases bring to the game is the best option.

I agree with the wait and see sentiment, but i wonder how it would change if squadrons could naturally shoot at ships at close range instead of range 1.