Be playing for awhile and to me it seems that the ramming and blocking is just broken. While the imperial side can often overcome this due to their powerful front arc. Its often death for a rebel ship.

Case im point i locked down a mc80 with a mc30 in its front arc.the mc30 is juat under 600 meters but even a corvette at 160 meters in lenght could due this for one or two rounds. Given that the mc80 is around 1,200 and easy outweigh anything but a ISD.

So should small ships be able to just stop larger ships in their path? Its aeems a better rule should be in place.

Maybe when a ship will overlap another ship for the 1st time its moved along the movement tool till it touches the other ship. They then both take a dmg card. Then when a ship moves that has been rammed the smaller ship is pushed away. And both receive 1 card.

So a ISD is blocked in by a vette swarm. On the ISD turn you place down the tool and move the ship base forward pushing the vette outward to make room

Just seems the ramming rule need some polish.

Sure us as a player base can help find a better solution to this rule.

Nope, it's fine as it is. It's one of the few things just about anyone can use to keep conga line nonsense under control.

Ramming is silly in outer space and should be dropped. These are spaceships, not triremes.

? What do you think would happen if a 1600 meter thing with 10 million gross tons hit a 300 meter thing with 1 million gross tons at 2000 miles per hour?

The problem is, what is the alternative without adding in some other overcomplicated and time consuming rule?

I like it, because although it is abstract, it is simple and relatively straightforward, letting the game flow on.

You go into it knowing how it works - you deal with it...

? What do you think would happen if a 1600 meter with 50 million gross tons hit a 300 meter thing with 10 million gross tons at 2000 miles per hour?

How many Damage-Cards-Per-Second is that?

? What do you think would happen if a 1600 meter with 50 million gross tons hit a 300 meter thing with 10 million gross tons at 2000 miles per hour?

How many Damage-Cards-Per-Second is that?

oooh, a new MMO acronym: DcPS! I like it.

"NO!"

-Doctor Ivo Robotnik

As a more serious post:

No, I don't believe it should...

Mostly because I'm a firm believer that, in this abstract game, certain things are points-costed with certain abilities in mind...

MonCals, for example, are pointed knowing that their tiny little front arc is tiny and little and getting in there means you generally stay there...

If you could be pushed out of the way, that would make the Ackbar+MonCal combination (as an example) more powerful, well beyond their listed points costs.

So if you are changing that core rule, you would need to change points costs in reference to that as well... Would certain ships go up because they are able to plough smaller ships out of the way while shooting them.

Do smaller ships drop in points due to the said plough-ability of them?

Unfortunately, changing such a core rule as that will and does have flow-and-follow on effects that also have to be considered from a game design perspective.

So I guess I'm in the "It works okay now. Nothin' is perfect, but any serious change and you might as well not be playing the same game."

No, I won my first Armada game by plowing VSDs into an AFMK II Rebel Flagship, the **** thing had Mon Mothma & Advanced Projectors. The thing was shrugging of my non XI7 shots, so I rammed it with 2 VSDs. Imps, with actual military grade vessels, are going to be better structurally. It is yet another weapon in the game. Changing it now would cause serious balance issues.

Simple as store bought pie, move the ramming ship to the closest corner of the ship where it rammed and where it can clear and "possibly" move on next turn...each take one damage...stop the ramming ship at the corner edge of the rammed ship. Ships in space would glance off each other 95% of the time in the oh so rare event it happens. In Armada it happens almost every game at 400 point and every game at 600 points in a 3x6' playmat. The op is wrong. The rebels have a much better advantage ramming IMHO. Slowing the imperials down with Rieekan is some evil stuff. Regardless, it is GAMEY as all get out and has no place in a modern game. GAMEY. Stupid crap that is easy avoided through simple rules. I play 600-700 point games and it is a bunch of boarding actions...hmmm except without out the interesting boarding actions and grappling hooks. Bunch of ships just shooting until one person dies. So exciting.....not. FR. If you need gamey stuff to win because you can't win otherwise, enjoy. However, institute a simple house rules as explained above and literally move on. Seriously, a C90 stopping a VSD, let along an ISD...Are you kidding me? Talk about fly casually...it is easy to avoid collisions in space but not on a 2D mat. FF Fligjt did really great with their rule--except ecplianing them. However, the only rule FF F'd up besides not making the base game 500 points is the oh so stupid, ridicously, germain, inept, space Neanderthal rule of ramming. It is like they got stoned and lazy one day while wrapping up the rules and said I know...lets have a beyond thunder dome moment and have two ships enter and one ship leave. That will be awesome...not

Most gamers who have been around...that meaning over 35...understand "gamey" when they see it in game and mutually understand it has to go. Despite one's success with the tactic there are certain things that just feel right and other that don't. Space battles are about ships on different planes whizzing around...not "triremes" as one gentlemen put it get stuck in the mud.

The problem is, what is the alternative without adding in some other overcomplicated and time consuming rule?

I like it, because although it is abstract, it is simple and relatively straightforward, letting the game flow on.

You go into it knowing how it works - you deal with it...

No, I won my first Armada game by plowing VSDs into an AFMK II Rebel Flagship, the **** thing had Mon Mothma & Advanced Projectors. The thing was shrugging of my non XI7 shots, so I rammed it with 2 VSDs. Imps, with actual military grade vessels, are going to be better structurally. It is yet another weapon in the game. Changing it now would cause serious balance issues.

There you have it. "It worked for me, don't change it." Seriously, Gamey **** is Gamey ****. So what if it works ...it is ridiculous as all get out. If you can't find another way to win...hmmm, too bad to bad, so sad.

I feel that you have a lot of hate in you.

If you can't find another way to win...hmmm, too bad to bad, so sad.

See, but that goes both ways. If you can't work around the rules as they were designed, figure out why instead of decrying *your* difficulties as the end of the game. Other people seem to manage just fine.

Abstract game. There is nothing abstract about space battles meant to recreate a basic feeling about ships whizzing around. Reducing ships to 2d planes even further and also forgetting that are aerodynamic of ships 95% of the time prevent ships from glancing off each other providing forward movement Is an utter break down of the imagination of the most basic fundamentals of ships flying around in space. Sure the upgrades are "abstract" etc. but don't put a 3D concept and bog it down perpetually in a 2D world if you don't have to. Simple glancing rules could have easily been written. Easy stuff. Still would have provided strategy with being ridiculous. The game is about navigation more than any other thing so at least they should have gotten that single fundamental right. No the designers come from the modern age where gamey crap is fair game and can be overlooked. Oh sure it is easy and fun to overlook how X card give y benefit but the collision rules are just too much too swallow. My wife even spits that crap out.

If you can't find another way to win...hmmm, too bad to bad, so sad.

See, but that goes both ways. If you can't work around the rules as they were designed, figure out why instead of decrying *your* difficulties as the end of the game. Other people seem to manage just fine.

Abstract game. There is nothing abstract about space battles meant to recreate a basic feeling about ships whizzing around. Reducing ships to 2d planes even further and also forgetting that are aerodynamic of ships 95% of the time prevent ships from glancing off each other providing forward movement Is an utter break down of the imagination of the most basic fundamentals of ships flying around in space. Sure the upgrades are "abstract" etc. but don't put a 3D concept and bog it down perpetually in a 2D world if you don't have to. Simple glancing rules could have easily been written. Easy stuff. Still would have provided strategy with being ridiculous. The game is about navigation more than any other thing so at least they should have gotten that single fundamental right. No the designers come from the modern age where gamey crap is fair game and can be overlooked. Oh sure it is easy and fun to overlook how X card give y benefit but the collision rules are just too much too swallow. My wife even spits that crap out.

Seriously, this issue is like attempting to defend Sarah Palin's qualifications for being president. God bless John McCain, he was worthy; but seriously people, you want to color your perspective with all the arguments you want to defend a ridiculous "gamey" rule that could have so easily been corrected...by all means delude yourself. Having 3-7 rams (7 sometimes because the speed is not enough to clear the ship lol) per game in 600 points on a 3x6' playing area is silly crap not even dignified to to defend. At least, have the decency to call it "gamey" and defend it because it is "the" ridiculous "rule", but please forgo any other grounds of defense beyond it is the rule and live with it because anything else is shallow, bs, and more importantly demonstrates your lack of vision on what the game could have been. I want to be clear, it is the only irule they got wrong (no too shabby)--just so happens it is a big one and here to stay knowing how pig headed the designers are.

Abstract game. There is nothing abstract about space battles meant to recreate a basic feeling about ships whizzing around. Reducing ships to 2d planes even further and also forgetting that are aerodynamic of ships 95% of the time prevent ships from glancing off each other providing forward movement Is an utter break down of the imagination of the most basic fundamentals of ships flying around in space. Sure the upgrades are "abstract" etc. but don't put a 3D concept and bog it down perpetually in a 2D world if you don't have to. Simple glancing rules could have easily been written. Easy stuff. Still would have provided strategy with being ridiculous. The game is about navigation more than any other thing so at least they should have gotten that single fundamental right. No the designers come from the modern age where gamey crap is fair game and can be overlooked. Oh sure it is easy and fun to overlook how X card give y benefit but the collision rules are just too much too swallow. My wife even spits that crap out.

If you can't find another way to win...hmmm, too bad to bad, so sad.

See, but that goes both ways. If you can't work around the rules as they were designed, figure out why instead of decrying *your* difficulties as the end of the game. Other people seem to manage just fine.

I use the rules just fine. Doesn't mean I am not old enough to see gamey and call gamey when I see it. I'll use it when I have to and can get away with it among the kids, but in house games with adults I will evolve.

No, your crap is trolling. I make an aurgument using several sentences. You don't agree...ah too bad baby boy. You put up a poster because you're too lazy too formulate a real response because you communicate using the equivent of modern day Neanderthal grunts....specialized in just innuendo--nothing more. Leaving others to do your dirty work you lazy coward. You are the troll sir. A pathetic, lazy one at best. You sit back and let the other crows pick my bones while you watch.

Nelson, maybe you should calm down a bit. You seem like you're getting really worked up.

Your posts all contain a lot of words, but to be fair, it's mostly repetitions of "gamey", "3d not 2d", and "glancing".

We all get it, you'd rather have a more complicated rule where ships tend to slide past each other differently. Great. Please continue to feel like that rules tweak would be beneficial. No one is saying that that you shouldn't have your opinion, people are just disagreeing with you (in the same way that you are disagreeing with them, except with generally less redundancy.)

The rules are very simple, and therefore effective. Are they the most plausible? Of course they are not, in this game where giant space ships that can travel faster than the speed of light stop within a couple miles off each other in outer space and shoot lasers at each other.

Many game mechanics are grossly abstracted, or exaggerated. Asteroid fields? Those don't post a credible threat, the rules are exaggerated. Debris fields? You can suffer damage on an arc that doesn't overlap the debris field, that's an abstraction. Pretty much everything about squadrons are an abstraction. Space Station usage is very abstract.

They had to strike a balance with simple to play rules. I think that ramming rules, while very unrealistic, make a great amount of sense in their implementation. I don't think they are "gamey" at all (and I doubt I will think that unless you want to try to convince me, you haven't mentioned why they are "gamey" yet.)

Yes, the rules do not utterly reflect reality. Yes, like every single aspect of this game the rules are abstractions. No, I don't think either of those things is a problem even slightly.

Collision in Armada is a game mechanic that, while not necessarily realistic, works to keep the game flowing without making things more complicated. Any other version of this mechanic would be susceptible to being "gamed", and as long as the current rules affect all players equally I really don't see any problem with them.

The Empire Strikes Back had a collision between Star Destroyers, even as the Falcon evaded them by flying "down". Similarly, Return of the Jedi's final epic battle occurred over a flat plane. Even if the collision mechanics aren't completely realistic, they're at least consistent with the films.

Without the collision mechanic people wouldn't have to give as much thought to planning their movement.

I personally like ramming someone to death, but that aside when you have multiple ships you have to plan your own movement well to avoid ramming your own ships.

I don't want theoretical answers to these problems, they just change the game in a way i'm not interested in playing;

• People could move their fleet in a large blob with very little navigation planning.
• Obstructing shots would be too easy or not work?
• Do you add belly up rotation to expose the other flanks, are arcs working the same?
• Can you move up and down now as well?
• Where do you end, do you want the whole game to be realistic? Should we engage at 100 miles from each other with torpedoes? Are the ships just a representation instead of a scale model?

The entire mechanics would change if you try and make the game 3D, and that's not a game i want to play.

The collision are a (sadly) necessary by-product of the movement mechanics. By using movement 'brackets' instead of a more natural movement distance or allowance, measured in centimeters, one cannot move a ship 'as close as possible' because you can only move it to position one, position two, or position three.

It's my one great annoyance with Armada. Why do we have three different forms of measurement? Range, Speed, and Distance. Why not just use centimeters?

In Armada it happens every game at 600 points in a 3x6' playmat...

...I play 600-700 point games and it is a bunch of boarding actions...

There's the root of your problem right there: you're playing a different game than all the rest of us. What you're doing here is like showing up on a chess forum claiming that pawns are OP because you start your pieces at point-blank range. If you're already making your own house rules (600-point limit is a house rule), you might as well house rule this too and move on.

You're big on telling us all how we shouldn't be playing only 400-point games and the game still works at higher points (which I'm not disputing, it sounds like fun), but then you come into a discussion like this and your position is predicated on your non-standard games. But the scale of your game definitely has an impact on this issue in particular, and is probably part of why it's proving to be a big deal for you and not for most of us.

So, my suggestion would be to play test your side-slipping house rule in your bigger games and see if it works well for you. If so, great! Then come back and present it as a solution to an issue you've identified with scaling the game up, not as qqing about a "broken" rule that's only broken in non-standard games.

It's my one great annoyance with Armada. Why do we have three different forms of measurement? Range, Speed, and Distance. Why not just use centimeters?

To make it harder to estimate with precision more than one measurement at a time with only one ruler. If Distance 1 is X cm, I'll always know if my fighter can engage an enemy (except for Speed 5 squadrons) because I can measure the Y cm movement distance, and plainly see the remaining X cm.

Similarly, if each movement tick distance was Z cm, I could use the range ruler to estimate the distance I can travel (and the range bands from that point) with much higher accuracy.

By making every unit of measure a slightly different standard they reward people with excellent visual awarenesses.