Battlefleet Gothic Armada is a computer game ...

How does this compare to a miniatures game?

Besides I would love Battlefleet Gothic as a miniatures game by FFG ...

Actually Battle Fleet Gothic started as a miniature game until (unwisely) GW axed it, and now it has a comeback as a computer game, rumors has it though that it maybe kickstart the miniatures game again.

I've been playing my backlog of computergames on steam instead of buying the newest games full price but apparently I should have actually burned all my electronics.

OMG I HAVE SO MUCH COURSEWORK TO WRITE WHAT AM I DOING!?

I am struggling to find out what makes this wave "garbage". Is it that the new stuff doesn't have even more dice? An ability to destroy something from previous release to make sure that you buy the new ship?

Can I have your stuff?

Battlefleet Gothic Armada is a computer game ...

How does this compare to a miniatures game?

Besides I would love Battlefleet Gothic as a miniatures game by FFG ...

GW is supposedly re-releasing BFG in the near future. I thought this is what the OP was referring to. In retrospect, the video game makes a lot more sense. My apologies.

In all seriousness, if not getting a new wave is enough to make you think about quitting, this game is probably not for you.

If you DO decide to sell your stuff, please flick me a PM. I'm always looking to expand my fleets for the right price.

battlefleet gothic has returned?

Do people rage quit over the themed releases of Monopoly?

Actually Battle Fleet Gothic started as a miniature game until (unwisely) GW axed it, and now it has a comeback as a computer game, rumors has it though that it maybe kickstart the miniatures game again.

I bought Battlefleet Gothic when it first came out. If you want to talk about a company not supporting a game then that is a terrible example to compare to SW:Armada. GW didn't even talk about BFG in their own company magazine. Compared to that, FFG is releasing new Armada product at a blistering pace.

The first expansion for BFG came out six years after the game was released. Think about that one.

Actually Battle Fleet Gothic started as a miniature game until (unwisely) GW axed it, and now it has a comeback as a computer game, rumors has it though that it maybe kickstart the miniatures game again.

I bought Battlefleet Gothic when it first came out. If you want to talk about a company not supporting a game then that is a terrible example to compare to SW:Armada. GW didn't even talk about BFG in their own company magazine. Compared to that, FFG is releasing new Armada product at a blistering pace.

The first expansion for BFG came out six years after the game was released. Think about that one.

Thats why I wrote I'd love if FFG would bring BFG.

Actually Battle Fleet Gothic started as a miniature game until (unwisely) GW axed it, and now it has a comeback as a computer game, rumors has it though that it maybe kickstart the miniatures game again.

I bought Battlefleet Gothic when it first came out. If you want to talk about a company not supporting a game then that is a terrible example to compare to SW:Armada. GW didn't even talk about BFG in their own company magazine. Compared to that, FFG is releasing new Armada product at a blistering pace.

The first expansion for BFG came out six years after the game was released. Think about that one.

Thats why I wrote I'd love if FFG would bring BFG.

That would be great. Make it a reskinned Armada. Sort of like Descent and IA.

I understand the initial disappointment, but when you start actually looking at the release, this is a huge game changer. And they did it cheap for the customer. That's a win-win. I find these rage-quit threads hilarious, especially when someone mentions Gothic's upcoming re-release in the same breath. Enjoy what is almost certain to be hot garbage rules and crap support from a company that cares even less about their customers. Say what you will about FFG's support for Armada, but don't you compare it to GW. They actually HAVE dropped a major game.

Actually FFG has shown they are not adverse to dropping a game with minimal support if it isn't as successful as they like. Granted, this is usually related to Warhammer products. Of course I am talking about DIskwars, the rushed out Black Crusade/DH 2.0 stuff, Probably Warhammer Quest, etc. So trying to hold them to a different standard isn't actually very effective when they have done the same thing, but faster than GW.

I bought Battlefleet Gothic when it first came out. If you want to talk about a company not supporting a game then that is a terrible example to compare to SW:Armada. GW didn't even talk about BFG in their own company magazine. Compared to that, FFG is releasing new Armada product at a blistering pace.

The first expansion for BFG came out six years after the game was released. Think about that one.

BFG had a much busier release schedule than Armada does. There were what, four factions on release? With the two main factions having something in the vicinity of 20 different units each (at the time of release) with the Orks and Eldar having more like ten or so each. Then there were another four or five factions added with between 10 to 15 units each.

As opposed to Armada with two factions with, what, six units each?

The main difference was that BFG had nothing like the upgrade system that Armada has. Any upgrades ships could take were specific to that ship, so there were less balance issues to consider when releasing new units. And they STILL got the balance wrong with some factions.

Over-all, it is probably a game that appeals to me more. I'd prefer Armada to be re-skinned with the BFG rules, so we could have BFG Star Wars, rather than port BFG into Armada.

BFG was also poorly balanced with the newer factions. Necrons broke the game...

BFG was also poorly balanced with the newer factions. Necrons broke the game...

Necrons were so stupidly OP it boggled the mind how they got through playtesting. They later added on the "Necron ships are worth lots more VPs" debuff to the faction but who wants to play against someone where the point of the game is "watch the other guy be amazing while you suck, but if you can kill one of his ships you win?"

I would argue, though, that even the base game had some balance issues. It's very difficult to deal with Eldar as Orks unless the sun is on the Ork table edge. You simply don't have the maneuverability to meaningfully engage them and the Eldar ships can get at your sides and particularly your rear (insert butt joke) pretty easily. Eldar holofields also create some weird meta-imbalance due to the fact that they're insufficient protection against decent-ranged weapons batteries but are absolutely amazing against everything else. If an enemy fleet shows up with tons of weapons batteries and little else, Eldar are going to cry. If the opponent shows up with a balanced assortment of weapons, it should be a fair game. If the opponent shows up with lots of lances and ordnance, they're going to have a bad time. That's not great game design. Don't get me wrong, I love BFG, but that game has classic GW weird game balance baked in right from the beginning.

Okay. I'm not excited by the flotillas. They might start to look more interesting as more previews come along, but I won't guess at that.

That said, I like the stuff I have, and I'll keep playing a game I think is awesome. I love Armada for the game it is, not for the potential to eat up all of my discretionary funding.

I'm seriously disappointed as well and have explained why at length elsewhere, but I am not "AdmiralNelsoning" the game. I still love it, I think the new ships will be great and add a lot of flavour, but I reserve the right to be disappointed at the clear withdrawal of resources FFG perpetrated from this game.

I agree that everyone has the right to feel disappointment at what Wave 3 is bringing. Personally, I like what I see, but do wish there was more. However, I am not so sure it is fair to say that there was a 'withdrawal of resources.' SOMETHING happened with those 2 missing SKUs, but none of us know what that is. That, plus the obviously cropped image does point to this originally being planned to be a 4 or 5 SKU release, and that has been changed. That doesn't imply a cutback of resources, IMHO. As others have said, it's likely an issue with LFL, but that's something we won't know for sure until they tell us.

I'll reserve judgement until I see the rest of the upgrade cards. I will say this much: That bomber upgrade card allowing bombers to re-roll will most certainly shift the meta towards the rhymer ball. I hope they have a card to counter it, otherwise games are about to get a lot longer with both sides packing a larger amount of squadrons.

Personally, the floatillas seem just enough to change the game by adding a new ship type AND upgrade slots. If they're keeping the points at 400 for now, then it's probably best that they didn't introduce any new ships yet as I know some people are barely wrapping their heads around wave 2. At most, I think we'll see new squadron packs...but that's it....and I'm fine with that.

There were what, four factions on release? With the two main factions having something in the vicinity of 20 different units each (at the time of release) with the Orks and Eldar having more like ten or so each.

Many of those ships were just weapons variations of other ships. But, in any event, it brings up an interesting question ...

Would you rather have a game that has 20 ships available at launch with no expansions, or a game that has 8 ships at launch with 2 new ships coming out every six months for the next few years or so?

I've heard a bit about rage quitting and Armada lately? Why would anyone want to play any game by GW?

There were what, four factions on release? With the two main factions having something in the vicinity of 20 different units each (at the time of release) with the Orks and Eldar having more like ten or so each.

Many of those ships were just weapons variations of other ships. But, in any event, it brings up an interesting question ...

Would you rather have a game that has 20 ships available at launch with no expansions, or a game that has 8 ships at launch with 2 new ships coming out every six months for the next few years or so?

The first one, by FAR. I loathe the concept of endless waves of releases, I'd much prefer a game that releases all it's product in a single hit.

I bought a Venator and I run it as a victory carrier...

Like a boss.

I did this with the Ton-Falk escort carrier.

That bomber upgrade card allowing bombers to re-roll will most certainly shift the meta towards the rhymer ball.

You have a 75% chance of damage on a black dice so a re-roll would make it about a 87.5% chance of a hit or better. On the other hand, that red dice on the X-Wing goes for a 50% chance of a hit to a 75% chance. This is a far more significant chance and better value for the use of the upgrade. Then you have Agent Kallus and Toryn Farr both upgrades will most certainly help in the destruction of a Rhymer Ball.

BFG was only balanced really for Imperial vs. Chaos.

Yes, there were more "ships" released initially, but these were largely variations of the same hull with different pointy bits and the big choices were largely lances, fighters or batteries.

Armada's upgrade system is more interesting, as you can create more than 20 variations on the 4-5 hulls that each side has.

The squadrons are significantly more interesting, as well.

If you are going to rage quit, you need to make it epic.

Please. Record you burning all your ships and post it on youtube. Please do this.

Ps heard ffg released only these two ships hoping folks would rage quit, the in a month they will announce wave 4 yhat will draw all thr admnelson's back and force them to tebuy their 1k in ships