If FFG ever decides to do another campaign set it in the outer rim and include a scum faction. Think i'm crazy, hear me out because i'm not proposing a full fledged faction.

Instead of new titles we get maybe two corvette models and six squadrons along with everything else you get in a campaign. So several different cardboard pirate bases are included stuff like that. Set the cost at $50 to accommodate the models.

Maybe one wave we get two expansions for the scum, the corvette featured in the campaign and a fighter pack? Maybe a flotilla as a third expansion? But nothing more then that. The Empire and the Rebel Alliance are the priority factions to continue to expand on.

The Idea:

Just like in Empire at War there sounds like there will be neutral systems that have to be conquered in the Corellian Conflict so keep that for this campaign. Why not include objectives that involve clearing out pirates?

Every neutral system has a chance of hosting a pirate base. I was thinking there could be a scum deck that the player approaching the system draws that determines whether the system is harboring pirates or not. The scum card also determines the strength of the pirate presence in the system, maybe a fleet cost and objective for the player attacking the pirates? To win, take out the pirate leader's flagship or destroy pirate base.

In these missions either a DM (if that group is running a DM) or someone from the other team controls the pirates. They also get to determine what the pirates have. Ships and squadrons have a cost (of course) as well as space stations. This player can pull anything from the pool of available scum assets as long as it meets the fleet cost.

Scum can't win the campaign they just exist as they would in the outer rim and have to be pacified. There is no dedicated player for this third faction to demonstrate that there are different groups out there and they don't work together.

...but unlike EAW, the Rebels actually had no resources to conquer a planet on the Outer Rim. They had just enough force to liberate those planets that WANTED to be liberated. No wonder than in EU it took them years after the Battle of Endor to conquer Coruscant.

I like this idea.

I've been brainstorming a similar idea, though with uncommitted locally-governed systems. I really like your idea of adding pirate factions into the midst.

I'm waiting on the game mechanics for CC to be revealed. While I am thinking about expanding on those, I don't want to reinvent the wheel, if FFG is already in the process of inventing that wheel.

I've found that it's hard to bring people on board for much complexity, unless much of that complexity is official. Part of that is that they're more willing to make themselves aware of the mechanics when it's official. FFG is also a more-trusted source for good game mechanics than your neighborhood nerd who 'has an idea!'.

Three things I see where this will not work.

1. Are there neutral systems? If not, you won't have neutral places for pirates. If there are, it adds a passive component to the game. Why go against a fully armed fleet when I can wreck some pirates for an easy win? Think about playing risk, and only claiming 1/4 of the board before you play.

2. You are adding a faction. How long before it becomes tournament legal? What will scum get for capital ships? How will a bunch of small ships be different than what the Rebels have? Reskinning them isn't very exciting. There was backlash when it was added to X-Wing from my understanding, and Armada isn't X-Wing so I don't see why a third faction needs to be added yet.

3. Having a DM play as the pirates would be exhausting, as both teams gets to assault a system. The DM would have to play multiple games in a short amount of time to accommodate the campaign. Or if you have the opposing team play, what is going to stop me from running my ships full speed at your titled ships? If I'm playing as pirates, I'd simply ram your Demo to death. After all, I'm actually Rebels and didn't lose anything in my effort to kill Demo. Again, this adds to passive play on both sides when I'll kill your good ships with pirates.

It's not a bad idea, I simply don't see the execution.

Three things I see where this will not work.

It's not a bad idea, I simply don't see the execution.

Obviously, things need to be worked out in more detail. Saying 'it will not work' before any details have been given is a bit negative.

1. Are there neutral systems? If not, you won't have neutral places for pirates. If there are, it adds a passive component to the game. Why go against a fully armed fleet when I can wreck some pirates for an easy win? Think about playing risk, and only claiming 1/4 of the board before you play.

It might be too costly to go neutral/pirate hunting, if those neutrals/pirates do too good of a job busting up your fleet, the one who hung back and preserved his fleet might then pounce on your and obliterate your fleet - especially, if the neutrals/pirates left your vessels 'scarred'.

2. You are adding a faction. How long before it becomes tournament legal? What will scum get for capital ships? How will a bunch of small ships be different than what the Rebels have? Reskinning them isn't very exciting. There was backlash when it was added to X-Wing from my understanding, and Armada isn't X-Wing so I don't see why a third faction needs to be added yet.

I don't think there's any prospects for tournament legality. This is casual stuff.

3. Having a DM play as the pirates would be exhausting, as both teams gets to assault a system. The DM would have to play multiple games in a short amount of time to accommodate the campaign. Or if you have the opposing team play, what is going to stop me from running my ships full speed at your titled ships? If I'm playing as pirates, I'd simply ram your Demo to death. After all, I'm actually Rebels and didn't lose anything in my effort to kill Demo. Again, this adds to passive play on both sides when I'll kill your good ships with pirates.

A DM's motive is not to wreck any particular side's ships. I think it would be to play the pirates/neutrals as pirates/neutrals would behave.

Think about playing risk, and only claiming 1/4 of the board before you play.

Thats the rules of two player risk..... starting with neutral armies that just defend... best tactic is to kill the other player rather than neutrals to prevent the expanding at the same time as gaining ground....

It might be too costly to go neutral/pirate hunting, if those neutrals/pirates do too good of a job busting up your fleet, the one who hung back and preserved his fleet might then pounce on your and obliterate your fleet - especially, if the neutrals/pirates left your vessels 'scarred'.

You just proved my third point.

I don't think there's any prospects for tournament legality. This is casual stuff.

Based on FFG actions so far and CC, they are including tournament legal stuff. If they add scum, all those people begging for a 3rd faction will have their foot in the door for tournament legal ships.

A DM's motive is not to wreck any particular side's ships. I think it would be to play the pirates/neutrals as pirates/neutrals would behave.

I said the DM would have to accommodate a lot of games for both sides. if the opposing team were to play as scum, what is to stop them from killing high priority ships by ramming it to death?

CC is meant to be played over several weeks. Adding in scum and neutral systems will prolong that significantly. I'm not against you doing this as your own house rules, but if FFG releases this and has tournament legal items (squads/objectives) I'd be pretty pissed I have to drop $50+ for a faction I don't want, a mechanic that encourages passive play, unless your Gink and just go for the throat right away, at which point you have to ask why was scum even added?

Perhaps I'm just salty by all the "We NEED a third faction" stuff that keeps popping up, but scum does not sound appealing as FFG sanctioned material. Fan made stuff with Mel's stuff is great, but not FFG.

Perhaps I'm just salty by all the "We NEED a third faction" stuff that keeps popping up, but scum does not sound appealing as FFG sanctioned material. Fan made stuff with Mel's stuff is great, but not FFG.

Ah, this is a question of saline. Well, that's fine.

IF FFG does a third faction, I trust that they'll do a good job of it. I remember the howls of antagonism against a third faction in X-Wing, as well as firm assertions that it would never happen. I think they managed it just fine. Scum gave new juice to X-Wing I think. You're free to differ on that, of course, and there's a discussion (elsewhere) to be had about the suitability of Scum (or other third faction) in Armada.

Ultimately, I think of this as a homebrew project. So, while I would like more 'civilian' ships being put out by FFG, perhaps with interesting new tournament-legal objectives (the person bringing the objective using a cargo/passenger ship, would also then have bought the expansion that it comes in), I don't really see it happening.

It might be too costly to go neutral/pirate hunting, if those neutrals/pirates do too good of a job busting up your fleet, the one who hung back and preserved his fleet might then pounce on your and obliterate your fleet - especially, if the neutrals/pirates left your vessels 'scarred'.[/background][/font][/color]

You just proved my third point.

Perhaps. I think the GM (I don't do D&D) should certainly make conquering neutral/pirate systems challenging. Also, I think that a GM is probably the one who would want to do more than the other players. These things are usually the brainchild of someone who is more invested in such gameplay than his/her friends are. This sounds like a feature rather than a flaw to me. I am also one of those people who does tend to get more invested in such things.

I don't think there's any prospects for tournament legality. This is casual stuff. [/background][/font][/color]

Based on FFG actions so far and CC, they are including tournament legal stuff. If they add scum, all those people begging for a 3rd faction will have their foot in the door for tournament legal ships.

Yes, that is true - just like they did in X-Wing. Not a flaw, but a feature, I think. YMMV

It seems like the possibility for an official Third Faction is really your issue here. If that happens, it happens, but the sort of expansion that the OP is talking about sounds a bit far fetched or far off. I'm interested in discussing with him something more plausible and imaginative, based on what we're about to get - the Corellian Conflict - and what we can do with that foundation.

Cardboard Cutouts!

ffg have done this for X-wing expansions and even the core set by putting cardboard tokens for the scenarios specifically. Neutral ship tokens can be based off of current ship class tokens and these can then be used as the neutral ships on the board. They would never be legal since no miniature and ffg would be making it clear that they would not release a miniature tournament-legal version, so the "scum" or neutral ships would be confined to campaign play only.

Perhaps the corellian conflict already has some of these but not yet revealed?

Cardboard Cutouts!

ffg have done this for X-wing expansions and even the core set by putting cardboard tokens for the scenarios specifically. Neutral ship tokens can be based off of current ship class tokens and these can then be used as the neutral ships on the board. They would never be legal since no miniature and ffg would be making it clear that they would not release a miniature tournament-legal version, so the "scum" or neutral ships would be confined to campaign play only.

Perhaps the corellian conflict already has some of these but not yet revealed?

Not to rain on your parade, but I'm certain that there will be no carboard cutout ships in the Corellian Conflict. That is, other than for the extra Station.

There does seem to be an extra asteroid field. I wonder what that's about.

I would like to see a campaign that uses the objective types as actual campaign moves. instead of picking one from each of the three categories instead you pick 3 of the same category depending on what campaign move you want to make and go on from there.

Assault Objectives are for taking control of systems.

Defense Objectives prevent Assault objectives from being played

Navigation Objectives allow for you to move your fleet past enemy occupied systems.

Cardboard Cutouts!

ffg have done this for X-wing expansions and even the core set by putting cardboard tokens for the scenarios specifically. Neutral ship tokens can be based off of current ship class tokens and these can then be used as the neutral ships on the board. They would never be legal since no miniature and ffg would be making it clear that they would not release a miniature tournament-legal version, so the "scum" or neutral ships would be confined to campaign play only.

Perhaps the corellian conflict already has some of these but not yet revealed?

Not to rain on your parade, but I'm certain that there will be no carboard cutout ships in the Corellian Conflict. That is, other than for the extra Station.

There does seem to be an extra asteroid field. I wonder what that's about.

Cardboard Cutouts!

ffg have done this for X-wing expansions and even the core set by putting cardboard tokens for the scenarios specifically. Neutral ship tokens can be based off of current ship class tokens and these can then be used as the neutral ships on the board. They would never be legal since no miniature and ffg would be making it clear that they would not release a miniature tournament-legal version, so the "scum" or neutral ships would be confined to campaign play only.

Perhaps the corellian conflict already has some of these but not yet revealed?

Not to rain on your parade, but I'm certain that there will be no carboard cutout ships in the Corellian Conflict. That is, other than for the extra Station.

There does seem to be an extra asteroid field. I wonder what that's about.

They are adding "Dust Fields" which prevent engagement, but don't cause obstruction. Check out the other objectives that were spoiled in the first CC article.

Well my goals with this concept were several fold.

First. Pirates and scum are a legitimate nuisance for even the Empire on the capital ship level. This has always been true in the franchise's lore and the new canon has kept that the same for the most part. Regardless of whether they're Black Sun (which by the way is canon), Hutt Cartel, or some other affiliation crime syndicates and random pirates are a fundamental part of the universe. This is also partly why the Empire was so stretched across their holdings because they had to constantly suppress criminal activity.

I don't think they would work necessarily as a fully fledged faction so I took the Empire at War approach. In skirmish mode, the equivalent of a regular match, the pirate's ships are available for either faction. In galactic conquest, which is basically campaign mode, the pirate ships defend and hold some of the neutral planetary systems in the galaxy. Before either side, whether Rebel or Imperial, can claim the planet they have to clear the pirates out. It sounds like there will be neutral systems in the Corellian Conflict.

I'm not an expert at the nitty gritty of game mechanics but I think it would be cool to see some criminal element that doesn't support the Rebellion or the Empire represented in at least one campaign.

For instance maybe you can claim a planet but if it has a criminal presence you can choose to eliminate which involves either a battle or simulated battle using dice (and random damage allocated to the fleet involved) or allow to continue so that your faction can quickly claim that planet. However if you choose to let the criminals stay then you get half of whatever resources you might get from the planet. However if there's a shipyard maybe you can repair ships for slightly less because of a black market there?

I would like to see a campaign that uses the objective types as actual campaign moves. instead of picking one from each of the three categories instead you pick 3 of the same category depending on what campaign move you want to make and go on from there.

Assault Objectives are for taking control of systems.

Defense Objectives prevent Assault objectives from being played

Navigation Objectives allow for you to move your fleet past enemy occupied systems.

Yes. It seems that with the Base Defense objectives, they're doing something like that. However, it seems like it's a halfway implementation of your idea.

That said, I think you're on to something that might be really interesting, though it might require a lot more cards than what we're getting - even with an added 12 cards.

To open up your typology a bit, I would say that assault objectives are for taking control of systems, but might also involve other targets, such as fleets or individuals (e.g. Most Wanted).

I like what you write about Defense Objectives. They might be cards that nullify the effect of a certain type of card (such as assault cards), or even entraps a specific kind of assault card.

Navigation might also include a broader set of objectives - such as logistical goals. E.g. you move your transports past the enemy blockade/privateers.