There is a very important difference, and one that will have great significance from wave V onwards.

Squadrons require Intel in order to do ship damage. Ships do not require intel to do ship damage.

Introduce snipe units and suddenly intel becomes a lot harder to protect. In all honesty I am very surprised we havent seen more anti intel squadron builds. IG-88 and Mauler combine very well to target intel units, and once you can add Saber squadron....

To play Devil's Advocate, though, you've now invested 48 points into killing a 12-20 point ship. And you're pretty likely going to die shortly after doing so, negating the need for you opponent to have Intel in the first place. It's a brutal combination for sure, but it's not enough on its own to stop a bomber wing.

48?

Saber, Mauler, Ciena Ree is 44pt. Ig88 an optional extra

Ciena delivery system. She wont die that easily and completely breaks tie bombers.

Its almost like it was intended that they were limited to 1/3rd from Day one or something....

Lets be fair, the difference in squadrons between merely waves one and two are so significant that they can barely even be compared. Wave 1 to Wave 5 is going to be almost like two entirely different games.

My two cents on top of this: I think the designers genuinely meant for squadrons to be the **** even in wave 0.

Then, by design or accident, I dunno, it turned out not to be the case. Squads just got lumped together and played no real part in the greater game.

Enter wave 1. FFG tried to make fighters more dynamic. Weird stuff happens. Rhymer. Yavaris. Mithel. Gallant Haven.

You can sense that they really want squads to be important and powerful, but it just ends up being weird. Rhymerballs and A-wing swarms. Angry Bees w/o intel. Meh.

Intel, Rogue and Grit start shaking things up, and squadrons become viable at this point IMO. You can now run credible bomber wings - and investing in AS squadrons becomes a real alternative (almost anyway).

And it continues. So yeah, the 1/3 cap was there for a reason, but it took a couple of years for them to get it right.

I agree, though I think FFG has been overcompensating. Every wave has goods for fighters and supporting fighters, though not much outstanding for big capital boats. The Liberty helps, but IMO the upgrade that still helps big ships fighting other big ships the most is Motti.

Its almost like it was intended that they were limited to 1/3rd from Day one or something....

Lets be fair, the difference in squadrons between merely waves one and two are so significant that they can barely even be compared. Wave 1 to Wave 5 is going to be almost like two entirely different games.

My two cents on top of this: I think the designers genuinely meant for squadrons to be the **** even in wave 0.

Then, by design or accident, I dunno, it turned out not to be the case. Squads just got lumped together and played no real part in the greater game.

Enter wave 1. FFG tried to make fighters more dynamic. Weird stuff happens. Rhymer. Yavaris. Mithel. Gallant Haven.

You can sense that they really want squads to be important and powerful, but it just ends up being weird. Rhymerballs and A-wing swarms. Angry Bees w/o intel. Meh.

Intel, Rogue and Grit start shaking things up, and squadrons become viable at this point IMO. You can now run credible bomber wings - and investing in AS squadrons becomes a real alternative (almost anyway).

And it continues. So yeah, the 1/3 cap was there for a reason, but it took a couple of years for them to get it right.

I agree, though I think FFG has been overcompensating. Every wave has goods for fighters and supporting fighters, though not much outstanding for big capital boats. The Liberty helps, but IMO the upgrade that still helps big ships fighting other big ships the most is Motti.

Same thing.

Also, I still cannot stress enough because certain people don't get it, but some people don't really like squadrons or playing with them. This is a tactical game, but hey, its marketed as the big ship game.

Its almost like it was intended that they were limited to 1/3rd from Day one or something....

Lets be fair, the difference in squadrons between merely waves one and two are so significant that they can barely even be compared. Wave 1 to Wave 5 is going to be almost like two entirely different games.

My two cents on top of this: I think the designers genuinely meant for squadrons to be the **** even in wave 0.

Then, by design or accident, I dunno, it turned out not to be the case. Squads just got lumped together and played no real part in the greater game.

Enter wave 1. FFG tried to make fighters more dynamic. Weird stuff happens. Rhymer. Yavaris. Mithel. Gallant Haven.

You can sense that they really want squads to be important and powerful, but it just ends up being weird. Rhymerballs and A-wing swarms. Angry Bees w/o intel. Meh.

Intel, Rogue and Grit start shaking things up, and squadrons become viable at this point IMO. You can now run credible bomber wings - and investing in AS squadrons becomes a real alternative (almost anyway).

And it continues. So yeah, the 1/3 cap was there for a reason, but it took a couple of years for them to get it right.

I agree, though I think FFG has been overcompensating. Every wave has goods for fighters and supporting fighters, though not much outstanding for big capital boats. The Liberty helps, but IMO the upgrade that still helps big ships fighting other big ships the most is Motti.

Yup, I also feel FFG did not give enough love to let big capital ships deal with squadrons, and the upgrades that help are very conservative (cough**point defense reroute**cough). QLT is the only one I'd take without too much hesitation.

This is a tactical game, but hey, its marketed as the big ship game.

Which is a point which we still disagree on, too.

....

Since I firmly believe all of the marketing mentions "Fleet".

But that's the wonders of Internet 'discussion'

Its almost like it was intended that they were limited to 1/3rd from Day one or something....

Lets be fair, the difference in squadrons between merely waves one and two are so significant that they can barely even be compared. Wave 1 to Wave 5 is going to be almost like two entirely different games.

My two cents on top of this: I think the designers genuinely meant for squadrons to be the **** even in wave 0.

Then, by design or accident, I dunno, it turned out not to be the case. Squads just got lumped together and played no real part in the greater game.

Enter wave 1. FFG tried to make fighters more dynamic. Weird stuff happens. Rhymer. Yavaris. Mithel. Gallant Haven.

You can sense that they really want squads to be important and powerful, but it just ends up being weird. Rhymerballs and A-wing swarms. Angry Bees w/o intel. Meh.

Intel, Rogue and Grit start shaking things up, and squadrons become viable at this point IMO. You can now run credible bomber wings - and investing in AS squadrons becomes a real alternative (almost anyway).

And it continues. So yeah, the 1/3 cap was there for a reason, but it took a couple of years for them to get it right.

I agree, though I think FFG has been overcompensating. Every wave has goods for fighters and supporting fighters, though not much outstanding for big capital boats. The Liberty helps, but IMO the upgrade that still helps big ships fighting other big ships the most is Motti.

Same thing.

Also, I still cannot stress enough because certain people don't get it, but some people don't really like squadrons or playing with them. This is a tactical game, but hey, its marketed as the big ship game.

I like squadrons, I don't like them being so mandatory in the game right now. This game has always been about choices, and right now a lot of people feel like they don't have the choice but to take flotillas/squadrons.

Also, I still cannot stress enough because certain people don't get it, but some people don't really like squadrons or playing with them. This is a tactical game, but hey, its marketed as the big ship game.

This isn't directed at Blail, but rather adding my rant to what you said.

I don't understand this argument, saying there shouldn't be squads because FFG marketed it as a "capital ship" game. It's a very weak point to make, and without squads this would be a lot less Star Wars-ish. This is one of the few things that literally drives me crazy when people don't like squads.

They claim "This is a capital ship game" or "Play X-Wing if you want squads". It's an emotional argument that holds no weight.

If you don't like squads, don't use em. Break the current squad meta. Don't pout and whine.

If you don't like squads, don't use em. Break the current squad meta. Don't pout and whine.

I like squadrons and I'm going this route with my Imperials. It's more fun to try new and different things when everyone else is doing what's "good." Worst case scenario I lose a game. Oh noes.

The game is not about "big ships". It's about fleets. Fleets (in Star Wars) include squadrons.

Creating (defensive) upgrades that mostly benefit large ships has to be very difficult to balance to avoid making large ships dominate squadrons (returning us to squadronless fleets again) and to ensure they aren't indestructible. One or two strong defensive oriented upgrades and/or titles and the ISD and MC80 will be very close to unkillable. It's also probably why we haven't seen a ship with 6 shields.

I'm a Squadron Player.

And I'm still looking forward to Fletchette Torpedoes.

I'm a Squadron Player.

And I'm still looking forward to Fletchette Torpedoes.

I am absolutely a squadron player. I have taken a hiatus from super screens until CC. Then Im going to be insufferable.

I am also excited to see these fletchette upgrades.

The game is not about "big ships". It's about fleets. Fleets (in Star Wars) include squadrons.

The game is not about fleets, we do not even have enough points to really have a ship squadron and not even close to a true fleet.

The game is not about "big ships". It's about fleets. Fleets (in Star Wars) include squadrons.

The game is not about fleets, we do not even have enough points to really have a ship squadron and not even close to a true fleet.

Well how large is a fleet?

The game is not about "big ships". It's about fleets. Fleets (in Star Wars) include squadrons.

The game is not about fleets, we do not even have enough points to really have a ship squadron and not even close to a true fleet.

The point is that the tagline is given as the "Game of Tactical Fleet Battles". How you want to define "fleet' is up to you. If you think a Fleet exists at 600,1000, 1500 points, whatever, knock yourself out. (Having just looked up both "fleet" and "armada" on dictionary.com, it seems pretty ambiguous what # of warships are required to fit the definition of either)

No where in the rules, marketing, literature does it ever say, directly or implied, or present itself as "This game is mostly about capital ships. There are also squadrons which are cool but you can totally disregard them if you want since it's not a real part of the game."

X-wing was built and marketed around small ships/fighters. We know this, and huge ships were added much later as a way to expand play. They require their own play mode (epic play), and are not legal tournament as of my most recent understanding of the rules. Huge ships in X-Wing are in fact an add-on, an expansion. The inverse is not true for Armada; the game was always meant to capture and incorporate both scales of assets and warfare into the basic game. This is why squadrons were released with the core game.

That's the whole Point.\

A Fleet is a number of ships - under a single unified command - assembled for a purpose.

By Vritue of the fact that we have One Admiral, and Build our Lists for Objectives...

... They are. Indeed. Fleets.

here's a fleet:

No, that's a Brand Name.

Not a representation of a Subject.

No, that's a Brand Name.

Not a representation of a Subject.

you must be fun at parties

Besides. Seemed even more appropriate since you brought the Enema to a Party, apparently.

I mean, I'm high on Pseudephedrine hydrochloride... What's everyone elses excuse?

The game is not about "big ships". It's about fleets. Fleets (in Star Wars) include squadrons.

The game is not about fleets, we do not even have enough points to really have a ship squadron and not even close to a true fleet.

The point is that the tagline is given as the "Game of Tactical Fleet Battles". How you want to define "fleet' is up to you. If you think a Fleet exists at 600,1000, 1500 points, whatever, knock yourself out. (Having just looked up both "fleet" and "armada" on dictionary.com, it seems pretty ambiguous what # of warships are required to fit the definition of either)

No where in the rules, marketing, literature does it ever say, directly or implied, or present itself as "This game is mostly about capital ships. There are also squadrons which are cool but you can totally disregard them if you want since it's not a real part of the game."

X-wing was built and marketed around small ships/fighters. We know this, and huge ships were added much later as a way to expand play. They require their own play mode (epic play), and are not legal tournament as of my most recent understanding of the rules. Huge ships in X-Wing are in fact an add-on, an expansion. The inverse is not true for Armada; the game was always meant to capture and incorporate both scales of assets and warfare into the basic game. This is why squadrons were released with the core game.

I just went with what the current and former Navy people told me the term means. Now it is not a written in stone set of rules, more a very formal guideline, that does vary nation by nation.

You go from

a single ship to a

Folitilla (if not capital ships) Squadron (if capital ships) and they are made up of several (normally three to five) of the same type ship. Moving on next is a

Task Group and this is made up of several Floitillas and/or Squadrons that work together. When you combine a couple of them together you get a

Battle Fleet and then as you keep moving up next you combine several of these, or all the ships in an ocean (for Star War a sector?) and you have a

Fleet, the only thing larger and even then only sometimes is the

Navy and this sometimes is the same size as the Fleet as the entire Navy can only make up a single fleet.

So based off this standard (in use today as far as I know)

Start with one (1) ship, next when you go to your Folitilla/Squadron you are now up to three (3) ships all of the same type. As we move on to the next level (Task Group) we are now up to about six (6) ships, when we move on to the Battle Fleet we are looking at twelve (12) ships or more. And when we get to a full "Fleet" we are typically looking at twenty four (24) ships or more. So I have never seen a fleet placed on the table, but I am also guessing that if I was to continue with this, it would turn it to something along the same lines of the argument that fighter/bomber squadrons have to be twelve fighter/bombers as they are called a squadron.

This is a tactical game, but hey, its marketed as the big ship game.

Which is a point which we still disagree on, too.

....

Since I firmly believe all of the marketing mentions "Fleet".

But that's the wonders of Internet 'discussion'

I agree with Dras here... if there weren't mixed fleets, I wouldn't have picked up the game in the first place. I am glad this is happening, as it makes the game shift back from the big ships w/ no squadron support & the MSU w/ no squadron support that was killing the fun for me.

I guess the point is, for every one of you who hates it, there is probably one who doesn't.

And for those of you that say "play x-wing" if you want squadrons, then you just don't understand why the combined arms concept is so appealing. I don't want one or the other... I want it ALL!!! (plus I think X-wing is just plain boring).

What I would LOVE to see, is new Objectives. Ones that favor types of squadron builds over others, or no squadron builds over squadrons, things like that, because there should be times it is a bad idea to bring squadrons, just like Armor sucks in swampy terrain.

More than anything else upcoming, I am looking forward to new objectives. It should open up a whole new style of play, and hopefully make the Interdictors more practical for tourney builds.

While this is just one example against my regular highly competitive opponent I played a zero no squadron game on the weekend to see if it could be done and I won. AF may not be large ships (i.e. other thread) but there close.

I was running 2x AF B’s, MC30 and 2 x Cr90’s

My opponent was running 2 x Vic1’s, 2 x Gozanti’s and a hell of a Rhymer ball.

I lost one AF and a cr90. If it was not for scatter I would have tabled him on turn 5. The last Gozanti scattered an 8 damage hit and was able to run away.

I let my opponent proxy some of the new imperial squanders.

The game would have been over by turn 4 if I had of brought along a way to create accuracies. The Vic’s braced approximately 16 hits between them before I brought them down.

I also feel if I had of taken AF A’s instead and maybe a cluster bomb or two there would have been a heap of dead squadrons and would not have needed to go so hard on his gunships.

This is not my style of list as I normally play around 100 points of squadrons.