Hi all

Not starting a flame war at all, just a healthy comparison.

http://www.thatsnomoon.info/blog/x-wing-vs-armada-a-star-wars-miniatures-staredown

Technically both are tactical games. If Armada didn't stop at six rounds then it could have potential to be strategic on the table, but as is, your tactic only works for 6 moves of each ship. Both games have heavy strategic elements in the list building phase, and at 100/6 vs Armada's standard play, Armada trumps simply because it' bigger. But comparing Epic X-wing to Armada again gives you a more equal comparison, and shows that both are very similar.

I prefer X-wing because it is cheaper, faster and easier to teach to the many kids I meet.

Epic X-Wing was the prototype to Armada. I love X-Wing but epic is cumbersome and very time consuming. As I just started playing Armada, it is superior in every way to epic. Love both games though. Just my 2cents.

I like both (and add the tripe crack addition of Imperial Assault to the mix as well). Different games ...

I don't get to play Armada much; not as popular around here, and it takes so long to play that when I can slip out to a three-round event I often have to drop after two. I wish it were a bit faster and less fiddly (too many extra bits) 'cause it looks so good on the table.

I wish X-Wing had the multi-dice and objective/mission mechanics that both IA and Armada use -- adds some good depth to the game.

Armada is the better game, I suspect. But it's longer to play, more intense, and has a much smaller playerbase.

I never cared for Armada making you plan two or three moves ahead. I much prefer the more reactive feel of X-Wing.

7 minutes ago, DailyRich said:

I never cared for Armada making you plan two or three moves ahead. I much prefer the more reactive feel of X-Wing.

Agreed. I tried it out at Gen Con the year it was released, and I hated the preplanning part. I was also financially deep enough into X-Wing that I didn't want another money sink.

And don't get me wrong, I think Armada is great. I bought two core sets and multiples of the first round of expansions. But the wallet dictated I stick with one or the other, and I had far more invested in X-Wing, so it won.

11 minutes ago, DailyRich said:

And don't get me wrong, I think Armada is great. I bought two core sets and multiples of the first round of expansions. But the wallet dictated I stick with one or the other, and I had far more invested in X-Wing, so it won.

For me, X-Wing is more Star Warsy. Huge fleet battles are cool, but Star Wars is about starfighters .

My analogy would be WWII in the Pacific. Sure, the battleships and destroyers were a part of it, but the theater was dictated by carrier power , and hence the little airplanes that made carrier power a thing.

19 hours ago, migs6000 said:

Epic X-Wing was the prototype to Armada. I love X-Wing but epic is cumbersome and very time consuming. As I just started playing Armada, it is superior in every way to epic. Love both games though. Just my 2cents.

I don't think you can call it the prototype because armada is so different in contrast. The only similarities are list building mechanics, and models that use dice, and the damage deck. Everything else is different. X-wing was the precursor but not the prototype. And yes Epic is cumbersome, but Armada doesn't have that refined of game play either and the squadron mechanic in Armada is as cumbersome as huge ships in Epic. The only difference is you don't have to play with huge ships by sticking to competitive. In Armada you have to count on if you are not bringing any squadrons then your opponent is.

Armada has its mechanical flaws ... capital ships outrunning starfighters being one of them (due to the way starfighter commands work).

They way I describe it to people is simple

armada is about going into the fight with a plan that is superior to your opponents

Xwing is about going into the fight with a plan and then adapting reactively to the game.

Have almost all of both. Love both. Play way more X-Wing because it's quicker and easier to get games. Armada is strategic. You have to have an idea going in, pick and objective, choose whether you want to kill ships, win objectives or some of each. X-Wing is tactical. You see you react, you out guess your opponent.

Sorry fellas (and ladies) Armada is the superior game from just a gamers perspective. The mechanics are better, less dice variance, almost every ship created to date is viable (even at competitive levels), etc... I often think when playing Armada that FFG somehow fixed everything it's botched or whiffed on in X-Wing with Armada. Armada has one major drawback. It takes sooooooooooo long to play a game. If they each clocked the same amount of time for a game I imagine the player bases would almost flip. It's really checkers (X-Wing) vs chess (Armada). Some people do prefer checkers though I'm not sure why.

I disagree: I think currently Xwing is the better game. I play and enjoy both. I will say Armada's models are plain awesome. Technically I guess Xwing models are better quality, but Armada models are huge, fun to paint and nowadays more iconic.

However, in a few waves, if Armada sorts out its rules issues and its huge glaring balance issues, it could be the "better" game, but right now its far too plagued with imbalance and poor support. Armada takes hugely long to play, and has been getting longer and longer as complexity creep creeps into the game. The game also can totally be lost in list building phase with no serious comeback, its all about whether you had enough planning and practice, and in that sense is a poor choice for people with limited time or patience. Armada desperately needs a relook at its base concepts and rules. The regionals data show very obvious skews.

Xwing also recently blew its meta wide open again with the Great Nerfing. Its has frequent FAQ support for its rules, its designers have been constantly attempting to create an even golden-er age for Xwing all the time.

18 hours ago, Darth Meanie said:

For me, X-Wing is more Star Warsy. Huge fleet battles are cool, but Star Wars is about starfighters .

My analogy would be WWII in the Pacific. Sure, the battleships and destroyers were a part of it, but the theater was dictated by carrier power , and hence the little airplanes that made carrier power a thing.

10 hours ago, Hawkstrike said:

Armada has its mechanical flaws ... capital ships outrunning starfighters being one of them (due to the way starfighter commands work).

The sad part is that this is now totally flipped on its head and you are now capable of first strike double taps of squadrons from long ranges due to new upgrades, and Armada is ALL about squadrons now.

5 hours ago, charlesanakin said:

Have almost all of both. Love both. Play way more X-Wing because it's quicker and easier to get games. Armada is strategic. You have to have an idea going in, pick and objective, choose whether you want to kill ships, win objectives or some of each. X-Wing is tactical. You see you react, you out guess your opponent.

Sorry fellas (and ladies) Armada is the superior game from just a gamers perspective. The mechanics are better, less dice variance, almost every ship created to date is viable (even at competitive levels), etc... I often think when playing Armada that FFG somehow fixed everything it's botched or whiffed on in X-Wing with Armada. Armada has one major drawback. It takes sooooooooooo long to play a game. If they each clocked the same amount of time for a game I imagine the player bases would almost flip. It's really checkers (X-Wing) vs chess (Armada). Some people do prefer checkers though I'm not sure why.

This, there are so many ships in X-Wing (even it's namesake) that are just not as good as newer ones.

12 hours ago, Marinealver said:

I don't think you can call it the prototype because armada is so different in contrast. The only similarities are list building mechanics, and models that use dice, and the damage deck. Everything else is different. X-wing was the precursor but not the prototype. And yes Epic is cumbersome, but Armada doesn't have that refined of game play either and the squadron mechanic in Armada is as cumbersome as huge ships in Epic. The only difference is you don't have to play with huge ships by sticking to competitive. In Armada you have to count on if you are not bringing any squadrons then your opponent is.

And firing arcs, and range, and setting dials, and obstacles, and so on.

12 minutes ago, migs6000 said:

...

And firing arcs, and range, and setting dials, and obstacles, and so on.

The firing arc act nothing like each other in the games. X-wing doesn't have yellow dots for measuring ranges. Armada dials don't hid information as well as X-wing. The dials are rather predictable and speed could have very much been just a counter or sliding token like in Arkham Horror. There is little to no hidden information in Armada. Obstacles are more like terrain instead of obstacles. In X-wing the only benefit is obstruction in defense which actually works both ways. In Armada you have not only obstruction but also repair. As for range the range is both movement and attack distance, but it is completely different segmentation with mid range being the smallest range.

So firing arcs, still different from X-wing, range, completely different from X-wing, terrain, function differently in X-wing, and so on.

Nope Armada is not X-wing 2.0. Nor is X-wing Armada Beta. That would be like calling Warmachines/Hordes Warhammer 2.0 because they use models, templates, and dice and so on.

Love the large ships in Armada, unfortunately, the small ships (fighters etc.) in Armada do not come prepainted... so not for me! The quality of the small ships also seem to lack a bit, which is a little annoying as you know from X-wing what details they are capable of producing in high quality...

For those that say Armada is more strategic and X-wing less so - Why ?

Infact, I would argue that those who say that Armada is more strategic and X-wing less so, have not played competative X-wing at a high-level and not even truely understood the full aspects of the game-mechanics of X-wing (said with a wink in my eye).

On 26/03/2017 at 2:46 AM, migs6000 said:

Epic X-Wing was the prototype to Armada. I love X-Wing but epic is cumbersome and very time consuming. As I just started playing Armada, it is superior in every way to epic. Love both games though. Just my 2cents.

Hourglassed turns and a cap on abilities/upgrades per pilot do wonders for this.

2 hours ago, Blail Blerg said:

However, in a few waves, if Armada sorts out its rules issues and its huge glaring balance issues, it could be the "better" game, but right now its far too plagued with imbalance and poor support. Armada takes hugely long to play, and has been getting longer and longer as complexity creep creeps into the game. The game also can totally be lost in list building phase with no serious comeback, its all about whether you had enough planning and practice, and in that sense is a poor choice for people with limited time or patience. Armada desperately needs a relook at its base concepts and rules. The regionals data show very obvious skews.

This is quite funny actually. You don't have to look very far in this forum to see the exact same comments about X-Wing . If one took your paragraph, and replaced X-Wing with Armada many would think it just another honest comment about X-Wing. We do tend to defend what we like regardless of its flaws.

I heard someone made alternate rules for this absurd game of armada the other day, where players started a new game of x wing for each squadron engagement.

Armada has a huge emphasis on proper setup. Xwing its pretty easy to "fly by the seat of your pants" but in Armada you try and do that odds are you are going to get hammered. Its really, really difficult to rebound if you flew past someone without getting a good shot, both because time limit and ship maneuver limits. Bumping in that game is almost impossible to avoid if you notice you might bump when you move, and bumping hurts.

Also, its objective based. Lot of the objectives boil down to a killfest with a twist but some of them can make you win the game even if you would have otherwise lost. I had one game in Sensor Net where my opponent largely ignored the objective, only claiming the points if he happens to have it, while i kept sending my VCX's out there to relocate them back towards me. I had over 100pts in objective tokens alone, and while he beat me by 70pts in kill points, he only had like 4 objective tokens and i had like 11 lol so i still won (that mission has objective tokens that move around when they are claimed rather than discarded)

7 hours ago, Ken at Sunrise said:

This is quite funny actually. You don't have to look very far in this forum to see the exact same comments about X-Wing . If one took your paragraph, and replaced X-Wing with Armada many would think it just another honest comment about X-Wing. We do tend to defend what we like regardless of its flaws.

Actually this is a failed attempted comparison:

1. Armada takes longer, average game time increased with wave5 to actual 2 hours, as opposed to normal 1.5hrs in wave3. XWING has goten shorter due to red dice power creep. Games now take about 45 min instead of 1hr. And ARMDA TAKES TWO HOURS REQUIRED BY TOURNAMENT. YOU DO NOT HAVE AN ARGUMENT FOR SIMILARITY. Pissy logic makes me pissy.

2. Poor support? Armada has not had an FAQ that even tells you how certain cards work (Rapid Launch Bays) for 100 days since the last wave released. POST WAVE.

3. Xwing is not currently considered imbalanced. Palp, x7, Manaroo era was much more restricted. We just currently have problems with Attanii, Paratanni, and TLT.

4. Armada takes a huge amount more planning and spends. a lot less effort on counterplay during a game. You can't really outfly in that game from a losing position.

I still believe what I said.

11 hours ago, Blail Blerg said:

However, in a few waves, if Armada sorts out its rules issues and its huge glaring balance issues, it could be the "better" game, but right now its far too plagued with imbalance and poor support. Armada takes hugely long to play, and has been getting longer and longer as complexity creep creeps into the game. The game also can totally be lost in list building phase with no serious comeback, its all about whether you had enough planning and practice, and in that sense is a poor choice for people with limited time or patience. Armada desperately needs a relook at its base concepts and rules. The regionals data show very obvious skews.

I would agree that Armada typically takes longer. I should have put a line through that one. Sorry. Poor support, I suppose support can be viewed through a variety of interests so I'll not address that here. Nevertheless I was addressing a couple of other of your points.

You mentioned imbalance. Just looking in this forum there is a constant call for nerfs and buffs. The intent is to either bring something back to the meta or weaken other things such that something will come back to the meta; all of these are calls for 'balance'. Many have said that the game hasn't been balanced since it came out with the original X-Wing vrs TIE Fighter.

You continued and said "longer as complexity creep creeps into the game". That has been the very description of X-Wing for well over a year now. There are posts here and on other boards of X-Wing complexity fatigue. Over 20 pages of FAQ with rules as long or longer. Referring to the rules, upgrade card, then FAQ, then FAQ for any other card it might influence in the game, the the page long timing chart just to attack, etc.

Next you said "game also can totally be lost in list building phase". Again this is and has been true of X-Wing since it came out. But, IMHO, it has gotten much worse. Now with these interactions fewer people can easily see and build top notch squads. It isn't about skill at this point, it is about delving into the complexity of interactions, knowing the FAQ and cards, the meta and net lists. This is very much a deck building game, but with miniatures and squads which regardless of playing skill can easily be won or lost before the first turn. This is true even when the chosen ships are balanced point wise.

Finally I was also addressing your comment "Armada desperately needs a relook at its base concepts and rules". People have been asking for a few years now as to when FFG will clean up the rules? Perhaps come out with X-Wing 2.0. This grows ever more as more waves are released and an ever larger FAQ with it.

I have not doubt that you were talking about Armada and meant no disrespect. But so many of your points have also been directed at X-Wing as well and I felt your post was ironically humorous. One does not have to look very far in this forum to see the exact same very similar comments about X-Wing. If one took your paragraph, [removed just a couple of comments about length of play] and replaced X-Wing with Armada many would think it just another post about X-Wing.

On 3/25/2017 at 5:05 PM, Astech said:

I prefer X-wing because it is cheaper, faster and easier to teach to the many kids I meet.

This. Armada IS the better game but faster and easier usually wins out. K.I.S.S. works almost all of the time.