Also. Campaigns tend to leave you with whatever you have. Not whatever you want like a skirmish. So Demolisher may be on the table, but without EL/APT/ACT or engine techs. Ships that rely on lots of upgrades or specific upgrades will be hurting.

I also figure squadrons, GR75s, Gozantis, Cr90s, and raiders will be easy/easier to replace. So here is to little ships as a meat shield for Home One or Relentless.

This is actually something that I like about these things. You get to play something other than netlists, and not every battle is going to be entirely "fair". It will make experienced ships with the right upgrades fun to acquire, and rewarding when it happens. Obviously we don't have all the details, but the idea at least of not everything being optimized/balanced in the same way as skirmish play doesn't bother me for a campaign.

The campaign will help people play and learn and draw people into this fantastic game. I can't wait!

Mad to understand whats going on. Hero works in risk management. This is the study of trends with no attempt to look at reality.

Hero, judge me, I am an engineer, this opinion shouldnt be a huge surprise to you.

Many interesting decision points in the game. Do you bring out effective ship titles and commanders early to gain a commanding lead? Doing so risks losing them in the long term.

I think we will see uniques like Demolisher and Rhymer saved up for the climatic battles at the end. I, for one, will go hunting for any effective uniques that show up early - even at the cost of a battle if need be.

So excited at the prospect of a campaign meta!

Many interesting decision points in the game. Do you bring out effective ship titles and commanders early to gain a commanding lead? Doing so risks losing them in the long term.

I think we will see uniques like Demolisher and Rhymer saved up for the climatic battles at the end. I, for one, will go hunting for any effective uniques that show up early - even at the cost of a battle if need be.

So excited at the prospect of a campaign meta!

They did state in the article that you move ships around the board so you could have a Fleet of Raiders suddenly attacked by an MC80, flotillas and some squadrons.

If someone posts a short message to encourage people to stop arguing like children, and you belt out 3 paragraphs of passive agressive retort WITH CAPS for emphasis to argue that you aren't the one arguing like a child...

Edit: also adding an edit to take a parting shot at someone..

guess what that means?

When you call them children, what do you expect will happen? Seriously?

They keep acting to type, apparently. Some trolls don't stop till a thread lock.

If someone posts a short message to encourage people to stop arguing like children, and you belt out 3 paragraphs of passive agressive retort WITH CAPS for emphasis to argue that you aren't the one arguing like a child...

Edit: also adding an edit to take a parting shot at someone..

guess what that means?

When you call them children, what do you expect will happen? Seriously?

They keep acting to type, apparently. Some trolls don't stop till a thread lock.

Get back on topic if you will. I have, so can you.

So far we have about 5.5 weeks until an article and no new information for a time.

I hope that the campaign will play when a player is missing or that you can add players if you gain more. I also hope that it plays out a little like a board game, where your battles affect the outcome of the campaign but other events remain beyond player control.

Edit:

Also, you could add in future sets cards and card board for ships. Even up the ship count for the Imperials and give them a Nebulon-B Medical Frigate perhaps.

I hope that the campaign will play when a player is missing or that you can add players if you gain more. I also hope that it plays out a little like a board game, where your battles affect the outcome of the campaign but other events remain beyond player control.

Edit:

Also, you could add in future sets cards and card board for ships. Even up the ship count for the Imperials and give them a Nebulon-B Medical Frigate perhaps.

It likely won't be in this set but i would like it if ships have special uses. Such as the Nebulon-B Support Frigate allowing you to recover some points from a list ship, the Interdictor limiting movement, the flotillas providing supplies and the like.

I'm keen to print out my own system maps to use with this campaign to make my own Galactic Conquest! Until FFG release officiL ones that is.

Mon Cal system, The Outer Rim, KDY, The Deep Core, Hutt Space. So many possibilities

Nope. Nope nope nope. This thread just got back on track.

Are you more excited about the new squadrons or the mission cards?

Mission cards. I hope they are well crafted. The ones I've seen so far look good. And not just because new ways to play are great, although they are.

I feel like for a lot of fleets right now, you take three objectives and your opponent has a clear and obvious choice which one is going to work best for him either because he built a fleet that one happens to work for (like he has a bunch of bombers/apt's and you took precision strike) or one just doesn't confer a real advantage to second player (almost any fleet that can't make real use of Superior Positions. I exaggerate a bit but you know what I mean). It is my fervent hope that these new objectives will allow different archtypes to do a better job of leveraging the second player advantage through objective inclusion.

I'm also hoping that maybe some objectives that rarely see play now might get played more because players will be able to force the choice with the right combination of objectives. Right now I feel red objectives in general are rarely chosen, because they often confer really easy to understand and leverage tactical advantages to the second player. We see it sometimes, sure, but I've played a whole mess of contested outpost and not so much advanced gunnery in wave 2. Hopefully the new blood breathes some life into some of the lesser used objectives we already have as well.

Also, at a glance things like station assault might breathe some life into VSD's, as though Konstantine wasn't gonna do that already.

Really looking forward to that preview article.

Right. This point right here covers this point exactly. The way that missions are currently is that I never, and I really do mean never, feel that my opponent will have to think hard about which mission that will be most optimal for him.

If the decision was much more difficult or the lines more blurred, maybe it will even subtlety reduce the need for initiative bids (which I feel are absolutely huge in this game).

There are a few squadron fleets that manage to do it. Truthiness runs a rieekan aces fleet which forces rhe choice between gunnery, fire lanes and supeior positions where there is an actual choice to be made. But as I said already, on the whole I agree. So often the decision of which objective i want takes all of 20 seconds.

If he runs Superior Positions with potential zombie Rieekan ships to score from, he's braver than I thought.

I see your point but he generally wins the squadron fight. I don't think he has it backfire often/at all.

If he's capable controlling the squadron engagement to prevent that scenario then Superior Positions is a great objective. Had it in my Rieekan Aces build until I realised the danger, then dropped it like a steaming tuber.

I don't trust my control of the game enough to give the opponent that opportunity.

So if when things with unique titles are destroyed you lose them for the rest of the campaign, does that include admirals? Are we going to be able to build fleets without them? Or is there going to be some loophole where "they got to an escape pod"?

Here's to hoping when the ship they're on is destroyed so are they. That would make a loss feel like a win in some cases.

Example: "Yeah, we didn't get that sector, but Ackbar won't be alerting the rebels to traps ever again."

So if when things with unique titles are destroyed you lose them for the rest of the campaign, does that include admirals? Are we going to be able to build fleets without them? Or is there going to be some loophole where "they got to an escape pod"?

Here's to hoping when the ship they're on is destroyed so are they. That would make a loss feel like a win in some cases.

Example: "Yeah, we didn't get that sector, but Ackbar won't be alerting the rebels to traps ever again."

I was wondering about this as well, because theres only so many available admirals...

So if when things with unique titles are destroyed you lose them for the rest of the campaign, does that include admirals? Are we going to be able to build fleets without them? Or is there going to be some loophole where "they got to an escape pod"?

Here's to hoping when the ship they're on is destroyed so are they. That would make a loss feel like a win in some cases.

Example: "Yeah, we didn't get that sector, but Ackbar won't be alerting the rebels to traps ever again."

I was wondering about this as well, because theres only so many available admirals...

You could always house rule something. Roll a blue dice, acc means they survive and are fine, hit means they are alive but injuried for X games, Crit means they dead.

Cound make a "Genaric Commander" for when you don't have/want to field one of the existing ones. Give a simple ability, once per turn assing 1 token to a friendly ship.

Or roll a red dice, miss means they are alive. Then you never have to worry about Ackbar kicking the bucket.

So if when things with unique titles are destroyed you lose them for the rest of the campaign, does that include admirals? Are we going to be able to build fleets without them? Or is there going to be some loophole where "they got to an escape pod"?

Here's to hoping when the ship they're on is destroyed so are they. That would make a loss feel like a win in some cases.

Example: "Yeah, we didn't get that sector, but Ackbar won't be alerting the rebels to traps ever again."

I was wondering about this as well, because theres only so many available admirals...

Maybe you lose the campaign if you ever lose all of your admirals. That would make for some very interesting play.

Protect the commander at all costs!

So if when things with unique titles are destroyed you lose them for the rest of the campaign, does that include admirals? Are we going to be able to build fleets without them? Or is there going to be some loophole where "they got to an escape pod"?

Here's to hoping when the ship they're on is destroyed so are they. That would make a loss feel like a win in some cases.

Example: "Yeah, we didn't get that sector, but Ackbar won't be alerting the rebels to traps ever again."

I was wondering about this as well, because theres only so many available admirals...

Maybe you lose the campaign if you ever lose all of your admirals. That would make for some very interesting play.

Protect the commander at all costs!

Then most missions would often just be focusing on killing them. Takes away from the overall campaign IMO

Fighters in this game are broken on a fundamental level, and considering this is supposed to be the game about capital ships and not squadrons there should have been titles and ship classes to expand the selling point of the game.

So sure, paint me the minority because I already own x wing and expected ship upgrades in my capital ship game.

I feel your mistake is assuming that Armada is a capital ship game. When, it is not.

It is a Fleet game, as evidenced by the very wording on the box. And a Fleet game assumes all aspects of the fleet, including its squadron support.

....

I mean, if you wanted a game to just push 3-4 figures/ships around at a time, as you said... You Already Have X-Wing.

Lol.

Fleet=ships.

Look at the box if you don't believe me, they didn't show off squadrons they showed pff three painted capital ships.

There are plenty of naval warfare miniature games you can play that are about ships blasting away at one another and maneuvering.

Fighters (or speeders, admittedly) and the aces that fly them are an integral part of every single one of the classic Star Wars movies.

If you're just looking for merely ship combat, you came to the wrong universe my friend!

Perhaps Star Trek Attack Wing is what you are searching for.

So what we do know:

Its a Map/Nodal campaign. Nodes have specific benefits.

There are 'resources', and there is lasting ship damage. (One node even allows you to repair faster).\

There are Roster sheets. Probably to help the multiple forces keep track of what they can use, and what has exploded.

There are separate Campaign Objectives and Regular Objectives.

Another Station, as well as 3(?) station cards.

Dust Clouds are an additional obstacle, no clue what they do as of yet thought.

So if when things with unique titles are destroyed you lose them for the rest of the campaign, does that include admirals? Are we going to be able to build fleets without them? Or is there going to be some loophole where "they got to an escape pod"?

Here's to hoping when the ship they're on is destroyed so are they. That would make a loss feel like a win in some cases.

Example: "Yeah, we didn't get that sector, but Ackbar won't be alerting the rebels to traps ever again."

I was wondering about this as well, because theres only so many available admirals...

Maybe you lose the campaign if you ever lose all of your admirals. That would make for some very interesting play.

Protect the commander at all costs!

Then most missions would often just be focusing on killing them. Takes away from the overall campaign IMO

Adds to the campaign IMO. After all, the battle of Endor (and the larger campaign against the Rebels) ended when Palpatine and Vader were killed. Thrawn's death at Bilbringi ended his campaign cold.

There's lots of precedent for this. And so long as there is a system for jumping into hyperspace or leaving the map you can preserve your commander if need be.

However, I wouldn't be against a generic commander with a bad ability like, "The number of points spent on your fleet is considered 10% higher for purposes of determining first player."

I'll be running jamming field all the time because it takes the goddamn station off the table.

I'll be running jamming field all the time because it takes the goddamn station off the table.

? I don't understand...

*edit, after rereading the The yellow Jammer Barrier objective, I think I understand what you mean. Jamming field is the fleet support upgrade FYI.

I'll be running jamming field all the time because it takes the goddamn station off the table.

Agreed. The station is weird.

I'll be running jamming field all the time because it takes the goddamn station off the table.

Just Take Station Assault as your red. They can't heal.

I think it would be a nice touch if they also included in the set a reprinted MOST WANTED objective card with the FAQ changes applied to it.

Here's hoping.

I think it would be a nice touch if they also included in the set a reprinted MOST WANTED objective card with the FAQ changes applied to it.

Here's hoping.

What FAQ? The most recent FAQ that I have downloaded does not have anything about MOST WANTED, it has FIRE LANES, FLEET AMBUSH, HYPERSPACE ASSAULT, ADVANCED GUNNERY, and OPENING SALVO and is dated 4/2/2016. Is there a newer one?