Your second paragraph is what I was thinking. Maybe have a regular objective, but each player has a secondary objective that the opponent doesn't know. So you can lose the battle, but still gain something out of it. That would also allow for lopsided battles still being fun. If you're outnumbered 500pts to 300, but your objective is to sneak a messenger vessel off of your opponent's board edge, you can still "win".

Good call reegsk.

In the best campaigns I've played, you can even make a strategy out of "losing to win". For example, a series of hit-and-fade battles where an inferior force focuses down an important enemy asset and then flees. Enough of these and you can slowly tip the balance.

As I've been brainstorming this more and more over the last few days, and in reflecting on what people have written here, I think that the board game Rebellion does give us the right framework for a campaign, even if the game itself doesn't really lend itself as the right platform.

The basic aspect that keeps a campaign interesting, I think is solved by what I was talking about before, that a fog of war keeps people from being aware of imbalances and being demoralized. Coupled to that, Rebellion has it so that it's not in the first place about military victory, but a political one (Clausewitz's "war is the continuation of politics by other means"). It's about a race to discover the hidden Rebel base before the clock runs out.

Now, obviously, a campaign around Armada (and/or X-Wing and/or Imperial Assault) should make military wins and losses critical to the outcome. If not, what's the point of playing out these games?

I was actually thinking about secret objectives, which t seems is similar to something FoaS has in his campaign system?

So instead of playing Contested Outpost where everyone knows what the battleground will be, each player picks a secret objective. Something like destroying the enemy flagship, reducing each enemy ship to half its hull, getting a particular ship off of the opponent's board edge, etc. It would be hard to make them balanced (although if everyone's onboard with a fluff campaign, and you have a good feedback loop, that's not as big of a problem), but it could add a lot of fun. You don't know exactly what the opponent's strategy will be, because you don't know what their objectives are.

Yes, I like that very much. It's kind of like Risk, in that respect.

I can see cases where the Rebels come out to fight the Empire, but why the Rebels have done so is not exactly clear.

I think we need a preview already. FFG, you're our only hope!

I'm very excited about this, both X-Wing and Armada scenes tend to get dominated by the tournament players because they have the loudest voices, but I feel it's the more narrative driven players who build things up from the grass roots level and get people more involved.

As the latter, I would like to agree, but what makes you say so?

Mega-late response here but I think it's the fact you can 'command your fleet in Star Wars battles' that attracts people to the game initially rather than 'you can do this to defeat opponents'. People may become more competitive after their initial buy-in, but in my experience it always starts with cool/shiny.

I'm very excited about this, both X-Wing and Armada scenes tend to get dominated by the tournament players because they have the loudest voices, but I feel it's the more narrative driven players who build things up from the grass roots level and get people more involved.

As the latter, I would like to agree, but what makes you say so?

Mega-late response here but I think it's the fact you can 'command your fleet in Star Wars battles' that attracts people to the game initially rather than 'you can do this to defeat opponents'. People may become more competitive after their initial buy-in, but in my experience it always starts with cool/shiny.

Agreed. Thus my Command Casual tag line. The shinies help a lot here.

And it looks like this one is "At the Printer," and I assume no minis means it won't be there super long.

And it looks like this one is "At the Printer," and I assume no minis means it won't be there super long.

We should be seeing an article by the end of the month

And it looks like this one is "At the Printer," and I assume no minis means it won't be there super long.

The lack of plastic was noted as a big deal in decreasing production time.

And it looks like this one is "At the Printer," and I assume no minis means it won't be there super long.

The lack of plastic was noted as a big deal in decreasing production time.

Silver lining: A lack of In-Flight Report announcement about this means that what you learned in your interview will still be news by the time you report on it.