When the fellow that won worlds spoke of the strategic choices of the game he spoke of the triangle of choices. With regards to squadrons he noted that you ended up with a "paper, scissor and rock" choice. So you have as a generalisation: Lots of Squadrons, Some Squadrons and None.

As far as other strategic choices go we have, again generalising: Hull Value (Motti Value), Activation Count and Ship Count. There are more, but this is just my attempt at making a complicated thing as simple as I can. With each wave of the game the importance of each category may well change, perhaps wave 3 will make Squadrons more important. In which case I have generlised through to the concept by suggesting that the importance of each category is shown by the size of the triangle I have drawn.

Now, keep in mind I am creating a diagram that helps explain the idea of a whole mess of choice and how it all interrelates. This is far from accurate and far from complete.

Now, notwithstanding many of the fine points raised previously, but making the amounts of points spent on squadrons less variable affect what players choices are with respect to the content of squadrons. But, by fixing in the relative importance of that strategic choice all the other choices diminish in value. As such you don't just reduce the scope of options as the others have correctly pointed out, but many of the other options will diminish in consequence. If everyone now plays with 100 points of squadrons and the variance is 100-134 in a 400 point game then it may well follow that activation count now becomes far more important and we end up seeing more and more 5 ship fleets and 2 ship fleets are far less important or viable.

I am also of the opinion that within each triangle you could add another triangle of choice. Within the squadrons triangle you could add another for the mix of squadron types (Fighters, Bombers, Mixed). Activation count will be given some interesting options with the Flotillas, because having a cheap but rather easy to kill ship will impact on the choices being made and how it relates to the other choices we have. I am looking at how to include the Flotillas and find myself quite torn because in many cases I have to remove something from somewhere to make room for the extra ships.

This is like a spider web, you pull on one strand at all the interconnected strands move about.

Such delightful choices and options, why diminish them?

I wouldn't mind 450 points.

I feel limiting squadrons to 1/3 of total fleet cost is smart at ANY point total and having a separate pool of fighter points opens up a whole can of worms and unintended consequences including actually killing off entire branches of valid builds.

50 extra points, however, would not terribly harm the game times but allow you just enough extra wiggle room to bring some extra toys, which can equal more fun without too many cascading consequences.

One could argue that lists that don't include squadrons at all are not valid since at no point in any Star Wars movie or TV show has there been a battle between capital ships without (and last time I checked this was a Star Wars game). Fighter-less combat is Star Trek space combat territory. The designers were smart enough to realize the potential of fighters and so put a 1/3rd of the points limit on them but IMO they should have had a minimum. Who knows maybe that since the supported points limit goes up with each Wave, Maybe in the future we will see a squadron minimum appear. I think a 50 point minimum in 400 point games is fair and won't shake things up too much.

Wow, at no point did I mean "valid" as "what happened in movies" because thats just plain stupid. I mean valid as in "worth bringing to the table"

If you built games around being true to fluff rather than balanced and fun the FFGs Star Wars property would collapse into un-entertaining nonsense garbage faster than Episode 1.

Mandating a minimum for squadrons would be as bad a mistake as limiting them to 1/3 fleet points was a good idea.

So was Warhammer ruined by having a minimum 25% allowance of rank & file troops or was it ruined when they said screw it make an army with whatever models you want?

FFG decided to do 2 seperate games, one focusing on small ships, and one focusing on capital ships.

Capital ships can carry squadrons, this does not equate to Capital ship engagements always have squadrons, Capital ships are more than capable of fighting other Capital ships sans squadrons, and Armada is a Capital ship game based in the Starwars universe, hence why squadrons are a garnish on the main dish.

If you want a game totally focused the other way around...X-Wing is going strong.

I am totally fine with the "You may spend up to" on squadrons, it gives you the player a choice, and choices are what make games great, Armada is a great game. And I could live with a 50pts increase, certainly worth testing out to see how it affects game play.

FFG decided to do 2 seperate games, one focusing on small ships, and one focusing on capital ships.

Capital ships can carry squadrons, this does not equate to Capital ship engagements always have squadrons, Capital ships are more than capable of fighting other Capital ships sans squadrons, and Armada is a Capital ship game based in the Starwars universe, hence why squadrons are a garnish on the main dish.

If you want a game totally focused the other way around...X-Wing is going strong.

I am totally fine with the "You may spend up to" on squadrons, it gives you the player a choice, and choices are what make games great, Armada is a great game. And I could live with a 50pts increase, certainly worth testing out to see how it affects game play.

Well stated.

This is an all encompassing game with the focus on ships and not squadrons, this game is more about precision movement, and commands than it is about flying a small craft to and fro.

Thus why we Command Casual in Armada and not Fly Casual

I wouldn't mind 450 points.

I feel limiting squadrons to 1/3 of total fleet cost is smart at ANY point total and having a separate pool of fighter points opens up a whole can of worms and unintended consequences including actually killing off entire branches of valid builds.

50 extra points, however, would not terribly harm the game times but allow you just enough extra wiggle room to bring some extra toys, which can equal more fun without too many cascading consequences.

One could argue that lists that don't include squadrons at all are not valid since at no point in any Star Wars movie or TV show has there been a battle between capital ships without (and last time I checked this was a Star Wars game). Fighter-less combat is Star Trek space combat territory. The designers were smart enough to realize the potential of fighters and so put a 1/3rd of the points limit on them but IMO they should have had a minimum. Who knows maybe that since the supported points limit goes up with each Wave, Maybe in the future we will see a squadron minimum appear. I think a 50 point minimum in 400 point games is fair and won't shake things up too much.

Wow, at no point did I mean "valid" as "what happened in movies" because thats just plain stupid. I mean valid as in "worth bringing to the table"

If you built games around being true to fluff rather than balanced and fun the FFGs Star Wars property would collapse into un-entertaining nonsense garbage faster than Episode 1.

Mandating a minimum for squadrons would be as bad a mistake as limiting them to 1/3 fleet points was a good idea.

So was Warhammer ruined by having a minimum 25% allowance of rank & file troops or was it ruined when they said screw it make an army with whatever models you want?

FFG decided to do 2 seperate games, one focusing on small ships, and one focusing on capital ships.

Capital ships can carry squadrons, this does not equate to Capital ship engagements always have squadrons, Capital ships are more than capable of fighting other Capital ships sans squadrons, and Armada is a Capital ship game based in the Starwars universe, hence why squadrons are a garnish on the main dish.

If you want a game totally focused the other way around...X-Wing is going strong.

I am totally fine with the "You may spend up to" on squadrons, it gives you the player a choice, and choices are what make games great, Armada is a great game. And I could live with a 50pts increase, certainly worth testing out to see how it affects game play.

If you want a game totally focused the other way around...X-Wing is going strong.

Well stated.

Thus why we Command Casual in Armada and not Fly Casual

I think you guys have missed the point I was trying to make. I do not want in any way squadrons to be the focus of the game. I merely suggested adding more points to the total point value but that those extra points go to squadrons, but by wording as a "minimum required," those extra points gets to adjust depending on the point size of the game you are playing.

This is a Star Wars game, specifically a Star Wars game that is about large scale Star Wars space battles. If you're really going to try and tell me that in Star Wars space battles, the fighters don't play an important role even when the big ships are going at it then I don't know what to tell you, but what I can tell you guys that being shown out the door and being pointed to the X-Wing community simply because I had an opinion in a thread about how we should be playing with our plastic toys I really didn't appreciate.

I don't think anyone said that squadrons aren't a big deal in Star Wars, and squadrons are certainly a big deal in Armada.

They simply aren't the be-all end-all of the game, and they shouldn't be.

Forcing their inclusion only limits your options, and that is less fun. If you like, you can add a minimum squadron point value to your casual games, if you like. But there's no real reason why FFG should change the ruleset to make squadrons an even bigger factor than they are, for this game centered around capital ship battles.

Forcing players to use squadrons would be the worst decision ever IMO. Suppose I forced you to play with NO squadrons? How does THAT feel?

You also can't really justify a rules change because you didn't see X, Y, or Z in the Star Wars films.

We never saw Mon Mothma face off against Tarkin, or never saw Vader in his TIE Advanced go up against an MC-80. We never see half of the Rogues and Villains ships at all, yet all of these things can happen because this game allows us to create our own battles.

If I don't have any squadrons in a battle, perhaps there's a creative reason for it? Maybe All of my pilots are ill? Maybe your rebellion infiltrated the mess hall at my headquarters and now I HAVE the fighters, but simply cannot LAUNCH them due to sick pilots? Maybe these are brand new ships that haven't been outfitted with their full complement of fighters yet? Or maybe I am returning from another battle where I lost all my fighters, or had to leave them behind to defend an Imperial Colony? There are so many reasons to justify it, if you wish.

And if you really really want me to bring squadrons, your best bet is to exploit my lack of squadrons and force me to rethink my strategy for our next game.

Something I love about Armada is the freedom to play the way you want to and the game feels balanced, forced choice makes no sense.

If I want to play 7 Raiders or 7 CR-90 I don't want to be forced into having to use squads, I generally love using them but maybe todays flavor does not include them. Games are not won on if you have squads or not, games are won on if you play well with what you have, and can get to the objective in time.

Last thought forcing all players to use squads would detract from the persons that cant use them well(or don't care to) but are excellent at managing their Capital ships and that's their play style.

This is a Star Wars game, specifically a Star Wars game that is about large scale Star Wars space battles. If you're really going to try and tell me that in Star Wars space battles, the fighters don't play an important role even when the big ships are going at it then I don't know what to tell you, but what I can tell you guys that being shown out the door and being pointed to the X-Wing community simply because I had an opinion in a thread about how we should be playing with our plastic toys I really didn't appreciate.

You are right, fighters are important. But then you don't need to change my mind, but that of your opponents.

If your opponents are not taking squadrons, take 3 Guppies, Ackbar and as many Y-Wings as you can. I would expect that to have a far more greater impact on a meta with few or none squadrons.

This is a Star Wars game, specifically a Star Wars game that is about large scale Star Wars space battles. If you're really going to try and tell me that in Star Wars space battles, the fighters don't play an important role even when the big ships are going at it then I don't know what to tell you, but what I can tell you guys that being shown out the door and being pointed to the X-Wing community simply because I had an opinion in a thread about how we should be playing with our plastic toys I really didn't appreciate.

You are right, fighters are important. But then you don't need to change my mind, but that of your opponents.

If your opponents are not taking squadrons, take 3 Guppies, Ackbar and as many Y-Wings as you can. I would expect that to have a far more greater impact on a meta with few or none squadrons.

Once Bomber Command Center comes out you'll see this much, much more. And I support that!

So, I think most can agree that there should be no "forced" fleet additions, a modest point increase (my vote is for 20 or 35) would be advantageous w/o becoming cumbersome, and no one here intended to crush OPs feelings but merely opined forcefully. I do enjoy this community better than "others" and I have yet to see an intentional insult but then I don't read every single posting. Lots of great input and if there is a point increase, I strongly believe it needs to be the last!

This is a Star Wars game, specifically a Star Wars game that is about large scale Star Wars space battles. If you're really going to try and tell me that in Star Wars space battles, the fighters don't play an important role even when the big ships are going at it then I don't know what to tell you, but what I can tell you guys that being shown out the door and being pointed to the X-Wing community simply because I had an opinion in a thread about how we should be playing with our plastic toys I really didn't appreciate.

Tell me something, just because we see a lot of squadrons in the movies, does that mean that squadrons would always be used in all operations?

Personally, I think not. We see several indications that the Rebels did not have a ton of pilots to cover everything such as transporting cargo, diplomatic missions to rebel sympathizer governments, etc.

Sure we see squadrons in the movies, becuase they look cool and it is easier to focus a camera angle onto a pilot than it is to show what a going on over an entire ship.

Thoughts once again, why does the game have to be limited just to give you an experience you want? Go create that experience yourself. Play with squadrons, play with them till your heart is content. If you play them well enough, you can definitely force others to bring squadrons to compensate

I don't understand why a moderate points increase (20-50) would make a difference that we won't already get come the next waves?

I don't understand why a moderate points increase (20-50) would make a difference that we won't already get come the next waves?

I always want a little bit more when list building. Adding points wont change this, I will want just a little bit more

Aaah, the clarient call of an Addict who is Never Satisfied. I understand now

800 points is comfortable.

800 points is comfortable.

Yep.

400 points each side.

800 points in total.

#TotallyTakingAgreeance.

Aaah, the clarient call of an Addict who is Never Satisfied. I understand now

Buwahahaha.

At what point total do the present rules become unplayable.... I've only ever played 300-400 point games. Has anyone pushed the limit on points and did it work ?

At what point total do the present rules become unplayable.... I've only ever played 300-400 point games. Has anyone pushed the limit on points and did it work ?

Lots of people play 500+ points. I like 600 and it works well. More guns means things come off the table faster and it plays in just a little more time.

At what point total do the present rules become unplayable.... I've only ever played 300-400 point games. Has anyone pushed the limit on points and did it work ?

About 430...

1K can work, 600-750 is about what I'd consider comfortable, To be honest. I will admit the 134 point limit value feels a little arbitrary and 'messy', but I'm fine with either 125, 134, or 150 at 400 points. I mean, I've wanted to go over the squadron limit for 1-2 Rieekan builds (usually by 2-5 points) but it's not a 'must'. I don't like enforcing points spent on squadrons but I do have a compromise idea if you'll bear with me I don't think the 134 points of squadrons=134 points of ships because of the inherent win conditions. Kill all ships and don't touch 134 points of squadrons, you win. Kill 134 points of squadrons and the game just goes on as normal. So while squadrons are powerful, I do think things are a little lopsided and artificially de-emphasize the ... ugh, I hate saying this, 'meta-role' of squadrons to be on par with an upgraded XI7/HTL pool with a bit of thematic flavouring. And no, I don't actually have a problem with the game as is.

That said, what could be interesting would be adding an additional pool allotted for Squadrons that still counts towards points spent (and thus, also acts as a pool for initiative bids). Instead of simply subtracting 20-25 points to make a 375-ish point fleet, you could still fill out your 400 points and use the additional 50 for a bid if you feel that confident in squadronless lists. Thus, you still gain a benefit from not taking any squadrons, but the benefit for making the game feel like its in the Star Wars universe (thus including fighters) is that you have some more toys to play with for 'free'. So a floating pool of 50 points while keeping the 1/3 of the fleet. That gives you a fighter max of 150 points in squadrons and max 400 points in ships (in a standard game) but there is still a minimum for ships after all. I may have to try that out some time. Ships might be what the game is about, but nifty fighter squadrons is what Star Wars is all about

Anyhow, I love squadrons and I feel pretty comfortable using them (my Y-wings seem to have a surprising reputation for being dangerous squadron killers and worthless bombers.). A game without squadrons doesn't feel right to me, but that's my choice.

Post Scriptum: And yeah, I get that there is a benefit of squadrons over ships in that it's a cheap deployment drop, but there are still objectives which completely mitigate that. I still don't think it's comparable.

Over the weekend, I just threw all my models at each other for solitaire play... about 850 each side. It was a 6-8 hour game, but I was taking my time. With 2 players, and setting up closer together, that could have been much faster.

Unplayable really depends on your time budget. If you get together with your gaming buddy for a day, 6-8 hours is probably it. If you are getting together after work on a weekday, 2-3 hours is more reasonable. Play space is an issue. I would want to keep to about 200 pts per square yard, to avoid feeling cramped.

With 7 ships and 12 squads, I felt like I could fit in some niche ships, like Leia driving a medic cr90 around to heal. One problem was that the first turns of contact really set the tone, so I worry that it might feel like 1 hour of battle, then 3 hours of knifing the wounded. Not so fun for the loser.

So, I think most can agree that there should be no "forced" fleet additions, a modest point increase (my vote is for 20 or 35) would be advantageous w/o becoming cumbersome, and no one here intended to crush OPs feelings but merely opined forcefully. I do enjoy this community better than "others" and I have yet to see an intentional insult but then I don't read every single posting. Lots of great input and if there is a point increase, I strongly believe it needs to be the last!

Oh I was fine with people crushing my opinion. I was mainly trying to feel out if others felt the same way I do. Turns out they don't, and I accept that. *quietly plans revenge*

In the end, it's a matter of perspective I guess. I personally feel like this game should have a heavy lean towards squadrons to invoke the feel. I honestly expected this thread to be mostly ignored with quiet Yay or Nays.

So, I think most can agree that there should be no "forced" fleet additions, a modest point increase (my vote is for 20 or 35) would be advantageous w/o becoming cumbersome, and no one here intended to crush OPs feelings but merely opined forcefully. I do enjoy this community better than "others" and I have yet to see an intentional insult but then I don't read every single posting. Lots of great input and if there is a point increase, I strongly believe it needs to be the last!

Oh I was fine with people crushing my opinion. I was mainly trying to feel out if others felt the same way I do. Turns out they don't, and I accept that. *quietly plans revenge*

In the end, it's a matter of perspective I guess. I personally feel like this game should have a heavy lean towards squadrons to invoke the feel. I honestly expected this thread to be mostly ignored with quiet Yay or Nays.