For new forum members and those new to the game in general, you've probably seen a lot of posts recently about how Armada is broken, the devolving, broken state of those threads, and then several members who made their own posts either defending the game or reminding people that this is a game played by lots of good people. Part depressing, part uplifting.

This is a post to talk about how Armada doesn't really make sense when you go strictly by canonical interpretations of different ships' capabilities. In no universe would a singlular CR90 corvette be able to actually bypass the shields of an ISD, or even get close enough to attempt to do so without support or some crazy upgrade (this is an open challenge to Dras to prove otherwise). But for the purposes of having a game that can be balanced between both factions, you have to be willing to accept this "broken" aspect of the game. Just imagine that the Rebels all of a sudden got Super CR90s. I mean, the Empire will eventually get that SSD, so why can't we have our suped up corvettes?

The same goes for some of the game rules, like collisions. For those who watched Rogue One, they know that when something tiny hits that ISD bow, it goes "pop!" (I feel like this isn't a spoiler, by any means). But to have a playable, balanced game, it does not. So you have to accept that gameplay mechanic (I had some trouble with this at the beginning).

When you can accept and play by these rules, the game is awesome. For those video gamers out there, imagine the rules as being a video game platform. Not like Xbox versus PlayStation, but like the physics engine for Battlefield versus the physics engine for Call of Duty. Similar games, but with different mechanics for gameplay.

But if you cannot accept the rules as they are written, then you just won't enjoy your games. And you won't enjoy them because you will refuse to build, deploy, and fly your fleet while taking those rules into account.

We had a player rage quit last night because he "spent 2 hours playing a game that was decided by a single engagement of fighters." The objective was minefields, and he chose to place all the mines right in the middle of the field. How did he deploy? Well he deployed on the opposite side of the minefield from his opponent, and they played ring around the rosie for 2 hours. It was his own fault that nothing happened, not the game's. He then proceeded to declare that his 2 ISDs should have been able to wipe out the entire rebel fleet from the other side of the board, all of his fighters should have been free points, and the rebels are OP.

So long story short/tldr, Armada has a really solid platform for a miniatures war game. If you can get over the canon-breaking aspects of it, you will enjoy it.

Also, if you're going to take minefields, take at least 1 strategic squadron, and don't play ring around the rosie.

Well said. I and others definitely enjoy Armada precisely because of its ability to bring intuitive and faithful representations of Star Wars fleet combat to the tabletop. Not in spite of it.

But this thread should be about embracing the game as it is, rather than a study of whether or not the game is realistic enough.

If somebody thinks it is ridiculous that a cr90 can damage an ISD and ruins the "theme" of the game for them, why even pick the game up in the first place since you know that going in? Some people clearly just hate fun.

But this thread should be about embracing the game as it is, rather than a study of whether or not the game is realistic enough.

That too. The title is admittedly click bait for readers who think the game is broken, so I used some tricky language to keep them interested and reading to the end. I think the second half definitely illustrates that point, and I agree with you. Hopefully some of them read it and think the same.

I love the ships, but I would never play the game because of the canon-breaking aspects.

A realistic wargame between ISDs and a Rebel fleet would be a cakewalk every time. There's a reason that the Rebels take a bold (and pretty stupid) gamble at Endor: they can't win a fair fight. A game that simulates any other possibility is something I'm never going to enjoy.

But I accept that and move on. I definitely agree that people who have a stake in Star Wars canon aren't going to easily be able to accept the gamey mechanics that "balance" two, by definition, asymmetric factions.

I get that some people feel that ISDs should roll rebel fleets every time, but that doesn't make for a good game experience at all. Why would anyone ever play a game where the empire always destroys all the rebels? That isn't fun for either side.

... I definitely agree that people who have a stake in Star Wars canon aren't going to easily be able to accept the gamey mechanics...

What does this even mean? Have a "stake" in the canon? Like do you own part of it? Do you use it as part of your personal identity? Did your life fundamentally change when Disney threw out the EU?

People confuse me.

I definitely agree that people who have a stake in Star Wars canon aren't going to easily be able to accept the gamey mechanics that "balance" two, by definition, asymmetric factions.

I'm not going to get into a "My Star Wars **** is Bigger Than Yours" argument, but I definitely feel like I'm pretty into the lore and canon of Star Wars and I enjoy the hell out of Armada. I just understand that sacrifices have to be made to make a game fun.

I'll draw a parallel to something completely different. I'm a huge WWI buff. It's just an extremely interesting time period in history for me. I have bookshelves filled on the topic and everytime I go into a bookstore, I almost always walk out with another. When Battlefield 1 came out, I was psyched. I knew from the getgo it would be an historical laugh, and it is. To say the game takes liberties with history is putting it mildly, but maybe a game of hunkering down in a trench for 98% of the time and getting trench foot wouldn't be all that fun. I have a "stake" in WWI history and I still enjoy the hell out of Battlefield 1. The two ideas aren't mutually exclusive.

The big difference then is that not everyone is going to make those sacrifices. This game isn't for them. I know that it isn't for me and I think it's perfectly understandable that lots of people who might be interested in the game because of the theme aren't going to enjoy it in practice because of these canon-breaking elements. I think that's the original poster's point.

For the most part, I think the game captures the 'spirit' of the canon just fine.

I mean, I think we can all accept that in our games of Armada the imperial player's 300 point fleet is one aspect of the gargantuan imperial Navy perhaps 30,000 'points' big, but that Rebel fleet with Home One over there is a much bigger proportion of their arsenal.

For the most part, I think the game captures the 'spirit' of the canon just fine.

Hear hear. Doubly so in the Corellian Campaign I think.

The big difference then is that not everyone is going to make those sacrifices. This game isn't for them. I know that it isn't for me and I think it's perfectly understandable that lots of people who might be interested in the game because of the theme aren't going to enjoy it in practice because of these canon-breaking elements. I think that's the original poster's point.

Yes and no. Yes, because I was pointing out what you said just now, while at the same time suggesting that they just let go and enjoy the game as it is. But you are most likely correct in that those canonically driven players probably won't let it go.

No, because the other point was that the only "broken" part of Armada is the canonical aspect, which doesn't really have anything to do with how the game functions as a game. This point was intended for newcomers, so that they don't think everything is broken about the game, with regards to several recent posts.

I also used my example as a teaching point and slyly advocated for strategic squadrons.

Being a narrator of games, I can imagine situations in which a Rebel fleet can fight against the Empire and win.

I've only played once, and it was enough to convince me to invest (you'll see me posting as soon as I get started collecting and gaming), and one of the reasons was because my CR90 and NebB almost bought the farm against a VSD. Only my CR90 getting behind the VSD and staying on it's six for three turns won the day.

Ok the VSD accidentally went off the mat, but the way I see it the CR90 damaged the engines.

I always thought the CR-90s should have been a flotilla, it would make a lot more sense.

We had a player rage quit last night because he "spent 2 hours playing a game that was decided by a single engagement of fighters." The objective was minefields, and he chose to place all the mines right in the middle of the field. How did he deploy? Well he deployed on the opposite side of the minefield from his opponent, and they played ring around the rosie for 2 hours. It was his own fault that nothing happened, not the game's. He then proceeded to declare that his 2 ISDs should have been able to wipe out the entire rebel fleet from the other side of the board, all of his fighters should have been free points, and the rebels are OP.

I just don't get it. Some people think that if Neb-B's were two little ships to a base, and Corvettes maybe even three, then suddenly the game would make sense in how they can damage large ships.

And while I think that would have awesome looking, mechanically the game would still play the same. At least this way all of my ships can look great.

If somebody thinks it is ridiculous that a cr90 can damage an ISD and ruins the "theme" of the game for them, why even pick the game up in the first place since you know that going in? Some people clearly just hate fun.

hey, the theme is respected IMO by the fact that my CR90s always get one-shotted by ISDs

If you are looking for something more thematic and respectfull of the reality of SW (for the asymetric aspect between Rebels and Empire), maybe you should play Star Wars Rebellion (board game).

I've seen a Warhammer 40k match where a Space Marine Knight got killed in 1 turn by a squad of Tau Infantry using EMP grenades (something like that). If that thing can happen, then a CR90 can certainly damage an ISD.

The big difference then is that not everyone is going to make those sacrifices. This game isn't for them. I know that it isn't for me and I think it's perfectly understandable that lots of people who might be interested in the game because of the theme aren't going to enjoy it in practice because of these canon-breaking elements. I think that's the original poster's point.

Well if it's not for them, why clog up the forums here with constant complaining? FFG isn't going to make vast game breaking rules changes so that they game feels more like a simulation. It's a game, and if it's not for you (not you specifically) then move on.

If you are looking for something more thematic and respectfull of the reality of SW (for the asymetric aspect between Rebels anf Empire), maybe you should play Star Wars Rebellion (board game).

Completely agree with this. Rebellion has its problems (the clock mechanic, while maybe necessary, is off-putting) but it's quite fun.

Well no, the game is not Canonically correct in several aspects but it comes absolutely close enough for a fun game. And let me ask would the game be fun if it was one where the Rebels only attack smaller ships and ran every time an ISD Hyperspaced in? Are people mad because the Empire doesn't have a automatic win option?

They made a balanced game, seriously, it is one of the most balanced asymmetrical game I have ever played. And I have played dozens of miniature games.

I am also a huge canonical Star Wars fan and follow the Star Wars story on several different formats. Do I want a completely accurate game? No, because it would be no fun and would need a "Force" element where the Force would overcome the Empire and give the Rebels a "luck" edge. Why do you think the Storm Troopers missed the heroes and an A-Wing was able to get past a SSD's defenses to take it out? It is most obvious in Rogue One. "I am One with the Force and the Force is with me." Do you think it was just a coincidence no one could hit him?

The Force affects everyone, not just Jedis and it will pick whoever it needs to restore balance.

Armada is for a better word, a Combined Arms Game.

Those who don't grasp that each ship always can have a function within a fleet, and have specialist task it excels at.

And when used correctly in combination with other ships (and squadrons), making it even better than at face value.

Will fail to see the finer points of the game.

One must go beyond the concept of having a single powerfull unit that can take on everything by its own, and more think in the lines of team work between ships and squadrons.

I'm considered somewhat of a canon expert by those who know me. Have read just about everything EU, canon or Legends. Breathe and live Star Wars.

And I love the game, because it's a GAME, based on Star Wars....NOT a simulation.

As for two ISD wiping out a rebel fleet, someone needs to go see Rogue One.......

Seemed pretty thematic to me when I had a factory-fresh Corvette one-shotted by 8 damage an ISD, even after evading. (And obviously the basic redirect would not work on exactly 8 damage, grrrr.)

I'm considered somewhat of a canon expert by those who know me. Have read just about everything EU, canon or Legends. Breathe and live Star Wars.

And I love the game, because it's a GAME, based on Star Wars....NOT a simulation.

As for two ISD wiping out a rebel fleet, someone needs to go see Rogue One.......

I did. And 1 ISD wiped out the entire Rebel Fleet . . . .

Cinematic license can be interpreted both ways.