That explains why I like Armada so much. I would absolutely fall for that girl. In fact I married her...

My wife said to me the other day she wanted to play some x-wing with me soon, I bought a couple ships.

I feel FFG have done a great job in differentiating the two games. Where X-Wing is tactical, Armada is more strategic, and the difference creates an entirely distinct gaming experience.

I made the opposite point in an earlier post. How do you define the difference between 'tactical' and 'strategic', in order to make such a distinction between the two games?

I define them thusly:

- Strategy is a plan of action designed to achieve a long-term or overall aim.

- Tactics are the methods one uses to achieve said strategy.

Ah, yes, that makes sense, and you make a good case for it.

Just on the use of terms, there are two types of definition that I've found to be salient.

One refers to the 'levels of war' as Clausewitz began to articulate them - he had two, the strategic and tactical levels of war, and this schema has since been expanded with the 'operational level' as a mid-range between the two. Some also add a political level on top of those three. According to that definition, both Armada and X-Wing (as well as Imperial Assault) operate at the tactical (ie. the lowest) level of war.

But that schema is really useless when it comes to articulating the differences between X-Wing and Armada. What you're writing about is the long-term vs. short term. I do think that Armada makes you think further ahead than X-Wing does, but at the same time, I think the best X-Wing players are also thinking further ahead. However, because the range of salient choices is greater in X-Wing, it's a lot harder to think very far down the line, whereas decisions in Armada have greater 'path dependency', so to speak.

When I'm not referring to the Clausewitzean scheme, I like to differentiate between the tactical in terms of maximizing efficiency with the capabilities at hand, and strategic in terms of anticipating another's choices and using that calculation to determine one's own.

It's because in X-Wing each turn offers a player a larger range of salient choices, and your success/failure will depend on anticipating the choices of your opponent, that I'd say that X-Wing is more strategic.

I bought into xwing after armada wave 1 but before wave 2. Played 1 game and im never going to play it again i think.

I just go by the fact the box says "A Game of Tactical Fleet Combat".

X-Wing is a CCG with cute ship tokens now. The REAL game is a home brewed EPIC Play deal.

I have not played the stock 100 point ADD CCG monster that FFG pimps... in about two and a half years now.

Armada rocks too of course!

X-Wing is a CCG with cute ship tokens now.

Wow, I've not known you to be that harsh.

I'll agree that epic is more interesting, even if it's harder to get people to commit to playing epic, but calling X-Wing a CCG...?

X-Wing is a CCG with cute ship tokens now.

Wow, I've not known you to be that harsh.

I'll agree that epic is more interesting, even if it's harder to get people to commit to playing epic, but calling X-Wing a CCG...?

How can you take anything he says seriously?

X-Wing is a CCG with cute ship tokens now.

Wow, I've not known you to be that harsh.

I'll agree that epic is more interesting, even if it's harder to get people to commit to playing epic, but calling X-Wing a CCG...?

How can you take anything he says seriously?

There's only two words in all caps and just one emoticon. The dude is being ice cold.

Over the past two years that I've been on this forum he's also been a consistent cheerleader for the games, so seeing him berate X-Wing seems uncharacteristic. (That, or maybe he likes CCGs, but I'm not getting that from the context.)

I gave X-Wing a solid try. I played a 5 round tournament, and 3 games prior to that and really. . . I am not a fan.

It is a good game and it can scratch an itch but I don't like the imbalance of the design, I don't like how each wave feels like a 40k codex release with "flavor of the month" style of upgrades and ships. I also don't like how their fighters are handled in the building aspect. There is no true balance in the game.

As for dice mitigation. . . I don't like it. In order to succeed in the game you have to have a way to mitigate dice which just feels like you have to build lists that fight against the core concepts of the game. . . Add onto all of that, there is no objective. All we are doing is fighting a giant battle with no real reason being provided. . .

Interesting discussion on tactics versus strategy. I've got a chess background, where we've had centuries of discussion on what aspects of the game represent strategy and which represent tactics. Tactics tend to be short term, and they rely heavily on observation. So for example, if I observe that my opponent has an overworked piece, I can start calculating how exploit that. That's a situational opportunity that could easily close in a move or two. Strategy is your long range master-plan. Almost all games have strategical and tactical considerations. Both X-wing and Armada are mostly tactical. Your strategical considerations in both games (and basically all deck building games) come into play primarily when you're building your fleet. You know certain other archetypes are out there, so part of your considerations are "What is my fleet going to do against the major archetypes out there?" or "How do I build my fleet to make the most of the objectives?" Those are all strategic questions, and good players come up with flexible answers before they ever play a game. A second layer of strategy happens when you reveal your fleet, select first player and objectives, and then begin positioning your ships. You should be orchestrating all these choices toward achieving a goal. If your goal is merely "to win," you're not quite thinking hard enough. A good strategist formulates a plan on how to win. From that point on, I think Armada is largely tactical. The plan is already set and the flexibility of the pieces is pretty much set. From there, it really is observing where your opponent is, looking at where he might go, and making the most of your abilities.

One way to work more strategy into the game is to build a series of 400 point games into a large campaign. An individual game of Armada asks, "What might happen in one battle?" A campaign asks, "how do a series of battles interact with each other?"

Interesting discussion on tactics versus strategy. I've got a chess background, where we've had centuries of discussion on what aspects of the game represent strategy and which represent tactics. Tactics tend to be short term, and they rely heavily on observation. So for example, if I observe that my opponent has an overworked piece, I can start calculating how exploit that. That's a situational opportunity that could easily close in a move or two. Strategy is your long range master-plan. Almost all games have strategical and tactical considerations. Both X-wing and Armada are mostly tactical. Your strategical considerations in both games (and basically all deck building games) come into play primarily when you're building your fleet. You know certain other archetypes are out there, so part of your considerations are "What is my fleet going to do against the major archetypes out there?" or "How do I build my fleet to make the most of the objectives?" Those are all strategic questions, and good players come up with flexible answers before they ever play a game. A second layer of strategy happens when you reveal your fleet, select first player and objectives, and then begin positioning your ships. You should be orchestrating all these choices toward achieving a goal. If your goal is merely "to win," you're not quite thinking hard enough. A good strategist formulates a plan on how to win. From that point on, I think Armada is largely tactical. The plan is already set and the flexibility of the pieces is pretty much set. From there, it really is observing where your opponent is, looking at where he might go, and making the most of your abilities.

One way to work more strategy into the game is to build a series of 400 point games into a large campaign. An individual game of Armada asks, "What might happen in one battle?" A campaign asks, "how do a series of battles interact with each other?"

X-Wing is a CCG with cute ship tokens now.

Wow, I've not known you to be that harsh.

I'll agree that epic is more interesting, even if it's harder to get people to commit to playing epic, but calling X-Wing a CCG...?

How can you take anything he says seriously?

There's only two words in all caps and just one emoticon. The dude is being ice cold.

Over the past two years that I've been on this forum he's also been a consistent cheerleader for the games, so seeing him berate X-Wing seems uncharacteristic. (That, or maybe he likes CCGs, but I'm not getting that from the context.)

Oh I love Armada and X-Wing like many of us here. But I am not buying X-Wing because of the FFG buy the new hot fixes and stay up to date with the meta wrap. That is why I compare it to CCG's now. It has become like that.

Oh well... I (we) know how real STAR WARS is supposed to be, and I ain't mad at FFG.

X-Wing is a CCG with cute ship tokens now.

Wow, I've not known you to be that harsh.

I'll agree that epic is more interesting, even if it's harder to get people to commit to playing epic, but calling X-Wing a CCG...?

How can you take anything he says seriously?

Don't Hate...

I think I'm in a cocoon of anti meta. For the most part, I can enjoy X Wing without fearing going against lists that will be the same as the next one. I'm literally only bought through Wave 6 (minus the Decimator and YT2400) and I can still land up in the top 3 at tournaments. I also can end up dead last. Most of us are excited for Imperial Veterans because we played X Wing vs TIE Fighter and want the Defender to not suck.

I think I'm lucky. But I respect those who don't like the game.

YUP!

Oh I love Armada and X-Wing like many of us here. But I am not buying X-Wing because of the FFG buy the new hot fixes and stay up to date with the meta wrap. That is why I compare it to CCG's now. It has become like that.

I see those fixes as natural responses to the human error that happened when they created the game and as they developed it. I think of that as vastly different from what I remember of GW (I played WFB in the mid-90s), which was naked: "buy this now or lose". Standard X-Wing is not at all like that. (You did not need C-3PO and you do not need the TIE/X1 title to win.)

I suspect that It'll also be the case that future development of Armada will also require fixes, and that they will produce those fixes in order to create as much balance as is possible in a developing game. The more a game is developed, the harder it is to foresee game-breaking combinations.

I think I'm in a cocoon of anti meta. For the most part, I can enjoy X Wing without fearing going against lists that will be the same as the next one. I'm literally only bought through Wave 6 (minus the Decimator and YT2400) and I can still land up in the top 3 at tournaments. I also can end up dead last.

Most of us are excited for Imperial Veterans because we played X Wing vs TIE Fighter and want the Defender to not suck.

I played TIE fighter, and I thought back then that the Defender was a bogus ship. My distaste for it has not lessened all that much. (I will confess that I learned to love the Phantom, but that took a while.)

All that said, keeping track of the meta - especially your local meta - is part of strategy, and X-Wing and Armada both have that.

Oh I love Armada and X-Wing like many of us here. But I am not buying X-Wing because of the FFG buy the new hot fixes and stay up to date with the meta wrap. That is why I compare it to CCG's now. It has become like that.

I see those fixes as natural responses to the human error that happened when they created the game and as they developed it. I think of that as vastly different from what I remember of GW (I played WFB in the mid-90s), which was naked: "buy this now or lose". Standard X-Wing is not at all like that. (You did not need C-3PO and you do not need the TIE/X1 title to win.)

I suspect that It'll also be the case that future development of Armada will also require fixes, and that they will produce those fixes in order to create as much balance as is possible in a developing game. The more a game is developed, the harder it is to foresee game-breaking combinations.

I agree with you 110% Star Brother. I just acknowledge that there has been a LOT of hurt feelings and general negativity because of it and it is worth addressing.

This forum used to be like hanging out at cheers (that funny show about a bar) but now it is more like hanging out at a rough billiard room, next to a rundown package store. Well not that bad but kinda.

None of that changes the coolness we can share with each other. I am not sour but I do take care to not get to involved in the heated meta/viable/cost to play talk anymore. Now if that means that some people think that I am just a big stupid happy dope that does not know how to play this game... well that is fine too.

I am not here to argue abouts.

X-Wing is a CCG with cute ship tokens now.

Wow, I've not known you to be that harsh.

I'll agree that epic is more interesting, even if it's harder to get people to commit to playing epic, but calling X-Wing a CCG...?

How can you take anything he says seriously?

There's only two words in all caps and just one emoticon. The dude is being ice cold.

Over the past two years that I've been on this forum he's also been a consistent cheerleader for the games, so seeing him berate X-Wing seems uncharacteristic. (That, or maybe he likes CCGs, but I'm not getting that from the context.)

He's always been a cheerleader for plastic ships, for Star Wars, for Epic casual play, for his own way of playing the game. Never for the normal game, the one he's now calling a CCG.

Reducing X-wing to CCG is petty. But then again, this entire thread is an invitation to pettiness.

This forum used to be like hanging out at cheers (that funny show about a bar) but now it is more like hanging out at a rough billiard room, next to a rundown package store. Well not that bad but kinda.

Hehe, my wife and I have been watching Cheers (from season 1) on Netflix.

But, forums will be forums.

In terms of keeping up with X-Wing, I've been out of it for a while (same with Armada), because work. I was going to hand out some Imperial justice a few weeks ago at the local Store Championship, but got sick. Then another store championship got sold out before I could put my name up. (With all I do for my local community, I figured I would have been a 'superdelegate', but no dice.)

Anyway, I'm pretty much to the point that I'm waiting for the store championship season to be over so that we can think about some more imaginative styles of play.

He's always been a cheerleader for plastic ships, for Star Wars, for Epic casual play, for his own way of playing the game. Never for the normal game, the one he's now calling a CCG.

Reducing X-wing to CCG is petty. But then again, this entire thread is an invitation to pettiness.

Do you bite your thumb at me, sir?!

This forum used to be like hanging out at cheers (that funny show about a bar) but now it is more like hanging out at a rough billiard room, next to a rundown package store. Well not that bad but kinda.

Hehe, my wife and I have been watching Cheers (from season 1) on Netflix.

But, forums will be forums.

In terms of keeping up with X-Wing, I've been out of it for a while (same with Armada), because work. I was going to hand out some Imperial justice a few weeks ago at the local Store Championship, but got sick. Then another store championship got sold out before I could put my name up. (With all I do for my local community, I figured I would have been a 'superdelegate', but no dice.)

Anyway, I'm pretty much to the point that I'm waiting for the store championship season to be over so that we can think about some more imaginative styles of play.

Nice! I am Norm kinda...

Say Brah... keep your YouTube going too. I like your videos plenty, and so do many other true blue Wingers out here!

He's always been a cheerleader for plastic ships, for Star Wars, for Epic casual play, for his own way of playing the game. Never for the normal game, the one he's now calling a CCG.

Reducing X-wing to CCG is petty. But then again, this entire thread is an invitation to pettiness.

Do you bite your thumb at me, sir?!

YEAH... he sure did!

UhOh...