One thing I think new players will find amongst an established group of armada players is that people are happy to loan ships, upgrades, squads, and tokens upon request.

This kind of cuts down on the 'having to have it all' approach to playing, at least at first buy-in. I own at least two of everything, and I'm happy to help a newbie supplement their lists or try something wacky.

Once again, puts a bit of a burden on veterans to take charge of shepherding the new players. Be the community you want to play in!

I'm concerned about X Wing approaching the too complex to continue point... and I fear Armada could go down that path. As a casual gamer, who never played any of those "harder" games, If I knew the complexity was spiraling, I'd probably not get into it. I mean new cards are good, but the more you mess with specific timings, and new functions or keywords, the sooner I'll be checking out of a game, or at least hesitate to spend money on it.

Make no mistake however: I still enjoy the hell out of these games. I just don't want to feel like I need a college education to understand what the hell is going on. I'll let the people who beat me with regularity who can calculate dice roll odds in their heads do that.

Not trying to be rude, but no one is disputing the rule difference between 40k and Armada. But stating that is like telling new players they should struggle to learn the game because there are harder ones out there.

Any tips on helping new players build lists and play the game?

Yes. Play at least 2 learning scenarios with them. Let them experience the barebones, most fundamental tactics of each side. During these two games, talk about things like Admirals and upgrade cards. Look for chances to point out "later on, once you're more comfortable with the basics, there is an upgrade card that would ..."

One thing I get when demo'ing the Learning Scenario is the difference in squadrons. Imperial players always say "yea but I have more" and the rebel players always say "I didn't think I stood a chance." Another common observation is the fact that if you just drive right at each other, you'll get maybe 2 rounds of shooting and then it's a turning war.

There's a lot of chances to say "there's a weapons upgrade card for that ships weapon slot that allows you to xyz" or "there's an admiral that makes turning star destroyers way easier."

Because of the way it's set up, I think Armada is much more new player friendly than a host of other games. Rather than try and boil down tabletop gaming to the most common denominator (a policy that has broken our education system), slowly have the patience to raise a new player to "the standard", or in this case, the "full" game experience.

Anything less would result in boring, watered down games that people invest in, lose interest in, and move on from like the current state of the video gaming industry. Immediate gratification works "right now" but it's meaningless tomorrow.

If you are playing a friendly game just take some time to say hey look at my list is there anything you dont understand or want explained. It adds the amount of time you need to play however is part game being in the beginning stages. I have a friend I play with from time to time that has never owned or will ever own anything star wars, so when i get together with him it takes about 30 minutes to go over everything before we start. Its just part of the deal.

Now for Torny play you need to know a rough idea of everything, however seeing we life with the internet and most likely your on the internet if you play. (or reading this) then ask the questions and read the FAQS. Look through the lists within the List section of the site here, it is part of being a competitive player, knowing the tricks and how to beat them.

Let me begin by saying I am a big fan of Armada, but not a Star Wars fan. For me the appeal of the game is in the mechanics, which I feel at their core are one of if not the best set of space combat rules made so far. Also I do tend to play 600pts and above games, which may be a factor in my thinking.

However, that being said there is one nagging doubt that I fear might ultimately be the games undoing in the foreseeable future. The sheer staggering amount of additional rules and abilities that are added with each wave.

These I fear are an issue for several reasons.

• It is hard to balance the cost of upgrade cards when they can be applied to such a large pool of ships, with some gaining more use out of the upgrade than others while all paying the same cost.
• It is getting hard to keep track of what is what now, most times when my opponents field multiple ships each sporting a lot of upgrade cards it because tiresome to remember what is what. This also goes both ways as I have witnessed opponents forgetting abilities they had which could have altered the course of the game.
• Upgrade cards combos are winning games, which to me feels a bit too much like a popular collectable card game, personally this cheapens the gaming experience.
• Not everything needs to have special rules to be perform a role, why can't the innate profile of the ship or squadron be useful enough. It is a common thing of Fantasy and Sci-Fi games, to weigh down units with a plethora of special rules. When a good stat line is sometimes all that is needed.
• It creates a special rule arms race, having a limited number of special rules is I think a far better alternative, than this escalation.
• When the game was launched there were I think 5 or 6 special rules for Squadrons, that number I think has doubled.
• It can be too much for someone who is new to the game, they may feel it daunting and too far behind a curve to get any enjoyment out of the game.
• Upgrade cards that increase stats are I feel fine as they are not a paragraph or more of text that need to be remembered, while providing a useful way to customise a ship.

If this trend continues, which from seeing how FFG have treated X-Wing, I fear we may encounter the same issues that game now faces.

When I field fleets, I tend to take as few upgrades as I can and no named squadrons, this does usually allow me to field more models on the table and it can win games. Maybe I am just getting tired of special rule bloated rules, does anyone else feel this is becoming an issue?

I have to disagree with your assessment, both in regards to Armada and X-Wing.

First is the point limit. Just like in X-Wing's 100 point limit, Armada's point limit of 400 points keeps the game sane. At that amount of points it doesn't matter if there is a million special upgrades the game is not anymore complicated than the 5-10 that are on the table. Sure they might be different everytime, requiring you read them, asses them and plan and play a very different strategy than in your last game but this is just the game creating unique and dynamic matches. The complexity of the game does not rise because there are more upgrades available because you can only fit a tiny portion (I would venture to guess less than 1%) of what is available.

Consider for a second that at 600 points, you are playing with 50% more points than a standard game, effectively raising the complexity of the game by 50%.

Its the same with X-Wing. A typical game has 3-4 ships, 5-10 upgrades... it never gets more complicated then that no matter how much stuff they add the game as a whole. Yes it requires you to look over your opponents cards, asses his strategy and try to respond with yours. But that in a nutshel, is the game.

As for assessment of balance, strategies, what is good with this or that ship, the impact of the introduction of a new card, ship or squad, the search for a counter to a popular build, the rising complexity of that process. That is also a HUGE part of the game and without it, Armada would stagnate quite quickly. There really is no end game here, as more things become available we get the opportunity to go back to the drawing board, re-asses and armchair command the possibilities. This is vital to the health of the game, if it was not for this the competitive META would simply stand still, we would see the same lists simply repeated over and over and over again because eventually players simply figure out the winning combos and there is no reason to re-asses. So getting new stuff to shake up the game is vital to its health.

As for new players, I have to disagree with this as well. New players enter the game with all the bells and whistles available, a far wider and more interesting door to walk through then the one we started out with in Wave 1. This is a good thing, not a bad thing. The complexity of learning how to play the game is not any higher today than it was in Wave 1. The core rules are the same and the upgrade cards are simply adaptations to the rules, ones you have in front of you when you play and again (only 1% of what is available). As such anyone can learn to play the game and its no more difficult to learn how to then it was when I started in Wave 1.

Sure getting caught up as a new player (aka getting your collection complete and in line with competitive play) becomes more expensive as time goes on, but that expense is simply there because you want it all on day 1 and that is not nescessary and none of us had everything on day 1. We only had what was released and frankly if you get into the game today you don't want to get everything that is released. There would be no point to it. You buy the core set and play a few games to figuire out what play style you favor.. then and only then do you look at the expansions with a fresh, understanding pair of eyes and consider what you want to buy. I played this game with Wave 1 ships until Wave 5. I just recently bought expansions from anything after wave 1 because it took a while to understand what it is I actually wanted. Sure if your in a rush, ya it can get more complex for you.

The area of the game where I think it's approaching the tipping point of "inelegant" is the recent flood of new generic and unique squadrons. Upgrades involving "synergy" between multiple ships are few and far between campared to the complex layers of overlapping buff and debuff "bubbles" that squadrons create. It's not impenetrable to the newer players in my gaming group, but it is a hurdle. I'd be happy to go a wave or two before they add much more to the squadron meta.

For teaching new players, the opening scenario and basic regular games are great.

The guy that decided to buy rebel stuff i lent my rebels to and gave him a list devoid of all the "heavy on the words" shenanigans, i.e. i deliberately avoided any weapon mod that wasnt adding dice or a crit effect and refused to let him use the Pelta (as thats a shenanigans ship and is terrible if not being brought for a specific reason, sorta like the Interdictor).

I wanted to show him the core of the game first. The core of the game is ship movement, range depiction, dice types, command dials/tokens, and the importance of squadrons. The most complex thing he had was Hera, which isnt even complex either.

He picked up on the game a lot quicker than i thought. Wasnt expecting him to buy anything for awhile, both because finances and he only played twice. Our first game with his own stuff i let him make his own list and he played fine even with the more wordy stuff. Only real issue is he deployed in a wall, which he'll learn to not do against an ISD quickly enough lol

Miniatures gaming is an expensive hobby, and Armada is frankly way on the cheaper end of the spectrum. Buying everything for both factions plus a core set is still about the same as getting a decent size collection for one faction in another game. Getting access to certain upgrades is a pain I agree, but you can definitely build competitive lists using the stuff that comes in the box or look to eBay if really don't want to buy certain expansions.

Armada is cheap compared to Games Workshop, but compared to practically any other wargame I can think of, it's way more expensive. Unless Warmachine has like, tripled in price since I last played it.

I have four full sized warbands, two rulebooks and three supplement books for SAGA, and combined they cost less than the starter set, one MC80 and one ISD expansion for Armada. And given the multi-role nature of models in that game, it's the equivalent of owning between 1600 and 2400 points of Armada stuff.

Mantic games make affordable fantasy miniatures for their massed battles game, there's a huge range of very affordable historical miniatures out there, and most games with expensive models run a very light model count.

FFG is like, right at the cutting edge of expensive models. It's not up to GW levels of silly pricing yet, but it's hardly at the cheaper end of the spectrum.

Miniatures gaming is an expensive hobby, and Armada is frankly way on the cheaper end of the spectrum. Buying everything for both factions plus a core set is still about the same as getting a decent size collection for one faction in another game. Getting access to certain upgrades is a pain I agree, but you can definitely build competitive lists using the stuff that comes in the box or look to eBay if really don't want to buy certain expansions.

Armada is cheap compared to Games Workshop, but compared to practically any other wargame I can think of, it's way more expensive. Unless Warmachine has like, tripled in price since I last played it.

Warmachine's cost has gone up overall (due to the new edition, overall more models needed for a standard list, cut-backs to online discounts) and it was never that cheap to begin with. People often get in with the idea that getting to a tournament list from a starter box isn't that expensive, but that's still $150+ most of the time and it's an extremely inflexible collection of models. Once you actually want to have options for building out your faction, it's often hundreds of dollars more and the myth of its cheapness compared to GW games becomes thoroughly shattered.

​On a more relevant note to the original post and segueing on over, I played Warmachine for years. The number of special rules in Warmachine is ridiculous and very player-unfriendly. When you're playing a standard game all of the enemy's special rules (spells, feat, special rules, special abilities, *actions/attacks, etc.) across their entire army easily number in the dozens if not over a hundred. Forgetting even one of those capabilities at the wrong place and the wrong time can result in a loss when your warcaster/warlock is assassinated when you thought they would otherwise be safe. This means that competitive players need to be constantly doing their homework to memorize every special rule/capability/special actions on every model in the game (beginning with the most common/competitive and slowly working their way out to the less-common/competitive options) as well as how those special rules interact in combinations for the more (in)famous styles of army builds and warcasters/warlocks. Suffice it to say, that is generally unfun for most people and very binary - either you've memorized the important stuff that can keep you alive or you haven't and can expect to lose on turn 2 or 3. In a match between someone who knows everything that can happen and someone who knows almost​ everything that can happen, the clear advantage goes to the better-studied player.

Armada is nowhere near that level of required studiousness where so much is riding on simply knowing what everything can do. Most of the special rules are fairly straightforward and keyword-dependent. It can be a bit much when you're new, but it's not bad. Yet. It helps tournament players a lot to be familiar with the more common upgrades/ships/squadrons, but that's not really required for newer players playing casually. Those players can simply take stock of the enemy cards prior to the game and during the game because there's no rush. Sure, there's some learning curve but Armada is a game where a lot​ rides on how the models on the table are deployed and used (moreso than any other minis game I've ever played, actually). Differing deployments and utilizations can make the exact same fleet play quite differently. Anyways, as new players gain experience with their own models they'll gain experience with upgrades and such as well. Once the initial hurdle is jumped, the learning curve is quite gradual. What we need to be wary of is an amount of game-breaking and complex upgrades/ships/etc. that increase the size of the initial hurdle to the point where they start acting as "bouncers" restricting access to the rest of the game as newer players drop out because they can't see the light at the end of the tunnel.

​Right now I think we're fine. However I do share the OP's concern that there could be cause for alarm should things go out of control further down the line. I think we're just fine on squadrons for another year or two, for example.

To be honest, the overall cost is always rather abstract when talking miniatures games anyway. I don't know many miniature gamers who don't also collect' to some degree. So yeah, low model count games are en vogue at the moment, but that's just another excuse to collect every miniature for the gang/warband/faction eh?

FFG know this. New rules are a part of that; lots of people like 'collecting' rules too.

Play 1500 point games with 1 upgrade per ship...........then you can use every ship somehow. That is the problem, people only "see" point values and want a quick game or two. But that is just it quick..........I have played several now with 1500 per side. I also use the ships from Mel,s and Kuat cards then you can see how they work together. Want a section of bricks...........use three dreadnaughts. You want a solid carrier fleet, use several Quasars, or Ton Falk. I have six ISD, , four MC-80 , etc, so at that point value, each ship fulfills it's abilities. Problem with 400 point is you end up having a CR-90 trying to do the job of an Assault Frigate, won't work well.

Imo te problem isnt the additions. its the core rules being **** complciated.

attack is 9 step

rules are really obscurely worded. resolve versus spend

squadrons have so many keywords and so many abilities and end up in a giant ball.

turn based activation

and finally, objectives. while i like them, they are just really dense bundles of exacting text.

Agreed, but they've deliberately broken attacks into 9 steps so that they can create upgrade cards which apply different effects at each of the nine steps.

I mean, I get that some people love that layer of complexity, but I'm seriously considering adopting the Corellian Conflict starter rules as standard: One upgrade per ship, admiral excepted.

I'd love to see this become a tournament standard (I know it won't, but still).

CC is only one upgrade per ship? Woah, time to redo my fleets for the store version of CC....

Imo te problem isnt the additions. its the core rules being **** complciated.

attack is 9 step

rules are really obscurely worded. resolve versus spend

squadrons have so many keywords and so many abilities and end up in a giant ball.

turn based activation

and finally, objectives. while i like them, they are just really dense bundles of exacting text.

Agreed, but they've deliberately broken attacks into 9 steps so that they can create upgrade cards which apply different effects at each of the nine steps.

I mean, I get that some people love that layer of complexity, but I'm seriously considering adopting the Corellian Conflict starter rules as standard: One upgrade per ship, admiral excepted.

I'd love to see this become a tournament standard (I know it won't, but still).

CC is only one upgrade per ship? Woah, time to redo my fleets for the store version of CC....

Only for your 400pt Original Starting list. 1 Upgrade each, Fleet Commander doesn't count to that limit.

The intention is, after the first game, you can buy more upgrades for the ships - but you don't start out fully kitted...

I think the other problem is the perception that "optimized" and "competitive" are the same thing in a miniature game. You can make really good lists with a starter and the things that come with the ships you've used anyway. The trend to build for worlds but play pick up isn't helpful

The trend to build for worlds but play pick up isn't helpful

Nothing kills a game faster than this, IMO.

I showed my 22 year old son the game when Wave 2 hit. I just dived in with everything and tried to teach him. Failed. He didn't get it and was overwhelmed.

I really wanted to have him in our Corellian Conflict Campaign, and so I tried it again many months later with Wave 5.

This time I played a few games with absolutely no upgrades. Just ships and non-unique squads. He got it right away and was excited. He actually did very well. After the second game he was ready. He wanted to dive in because he understood the mechanics. The upgrade cards just tweak the understood rules of the game (of course they do it A LOT).

Now he has built his CC fleet and we are both excited (even though he is rebel scum)

KushielRDF did this with my brother and it worked quite well. My bro played the learning scenario with me, then a 1 upgrade per ship game with Kush and by then was familiar enough to play quite well in his next game. I can totally see why people get overwhelmed, but it is made much easier with a slower easing in period.

Imo te problem isnt the additions. its the core rules being **** complciated.

attack is 9 step

rules are really obscurely worded. resolve versus spend

squadrons have so many keywords and so many abilities and end up in a giant ball.

turn based activation

and finally, objectives. while i like them, they are just really dense bundles of exacting text.

Agreed, but they've deliberately broken attacks into 9 steps so that they can create upgrade cards which apply different effects at each of the nine steps.

I mean, I get that some people love that layer of complexity, but I'm seriously considering adopting the Corellian Conflict starter rules as standard: One upgrade per ship, admiral excepted.

I'd love to see this become a tournament standard (I know it won't, but still).

CC is only one upgrade per ship? Woah, time to redo my fleets for the store version of CC....

The trend to build for worlds but play pick up isn't helpful

Nothing kills a game faster than this, IMO.

Yeah lord knows the first time I went to a get together that was just about being able to play and I went up against a list that had like 6 YT-2400s and a nasty bomber wing it was really really hard for me to enjoy it.

Yeah usually in a casual setting, both Armada and Xwing, if i come up with a list that proves to be rather robust and lethal i avoid it for future games

I like shenanigans, not facerolls.

Play warhammer 40k. Armada is, if anything, lacking special rules when compared to that mess of a game!

Play 1500 point games with 1 upgrade per ship...........then you can use every ship somehow. That is the problem, people only "see" point values and want a quick game or two. But that is just it quick..........I have played several now with 1500 per side. I also use the ships from Mel,s and Kuat cards then you can see how they work together. Want a section of bricks...........use three dreadnaughts. You want a solid carrier fleet, use several Quasars, or Ton Falk. I have six ISD, , four MC-80 , etc, so at that point value, each ship fulfills it's abilities. Problem with 400 point is you end up having a CR-90 trying to do the job of an Assault Frigate, won't work well.

1,500 point game???

Holy cow! And i thought my 900 point fleet with 300 point fighter game was out there