Just now, Darth Lupine said:

Hehe, good points.

I mean, I really think this is just a RAI vs RAW case...

They clearly intended for the dials to be on the base, or they'd have created my system themselves or simply used cards and tokens like x-wing, but as far as I can tell... the rules as written could be open to interpretation due to the lack of definition.

So, I wouldn't say good points... but they're points. lol

Indeed. Still, the legality is dubious at best. Hmm. And there's the color issue still. I'm picky. More consideration is needed. Lol

Great idea, but I also ring the colours a bit jarring !)

Just now, Daft Blazer said:

Great idea, but I also ring the colours a bit jarring !)

Should've seen the older ones lol They were VIVID. (pic related)



of course, PLA is super easy to paint. so long as the color is represented on the squadron it shouldn't interfere with the functionality lol

This is true, and I have some painting skill. Hmm.

Have a set and have played a number of games with them. They do exactly what I want them to do; limit the constant picking up and putting down of squads.

Even if I played tournaments, I'd still use them to simplify casual games...since we bump everything and it has definitely resulted in questions as to whether someone is at a certain distance or in a certain arc.

End result? They work and add convenience to what is imo a sub-optimal system created by FFG.

I like the cleverness of the design and what the developer is trying to fix, but I don't like these at all. I should be able to look at a glance at the opponent's squadron ball and not need to look away to a separate reference to determine their health. You're creating a 2 step process for your opponent to determine the situation of your squadrons (looking at the squadrons themselves for positioning, then another location for health, back and forth) which isn't actually a part of the game outside of token status.

5 minutes ago, Joe Censored said:

I like the cleverness of the design and what the developer is trying to fix, but I don't like these at all. I should be able to look at a glance at the opponent's squadron ball and not need to look away to a separate reference to determine their health. You're creating a 2 step process for your opponent to determine the situation of your squadrons (looking at the squadrons themselves for positioning, then another location for health, back and forth) which isn't actually a part of the game outside of token status.

While true, you already do this for ships hull.

That said, if the bases were a little larger I would seriously considering wiring up an LED hp gauge to each squadron.

3 minutes ago, *Flare_22 said:

While true, you already do this for ships hull.

That said, if the bases were a little larger I would seriously considering wiring up an LED hp gauge to each squadron.

Yes, but you're more likely to already be keeping track in your head the status of the enemy capital ships once you start putting damage in past their shields. A dozen tie variants on the board though, I need to see their individual status.

Glad to see you got these off the ground and they are selling. On that note:

"Red group acknowledges! Beginning attack!"

"Red group reporting! Taking losses!"

"Red group reporting! Taking losses!"

"Red group reporting! Taking losses!"

"Red group reporting! Taking losses!"

It's a perspective many who have never used these share, but looking at it with any scrutiny as an excuse to disallow people to use them can be a bit humorous. It creates a 2 step process in which the most difficult step is matching colors and numbers.... A task most people learned to do before entering grade school. And I say that, NOT to be insulting but to help your perspective grasp the reality of these plates. They are really easy to use. Easy to read, and the time saved from not constantly picking up and replacing your squads makes up for time gained, if any, during tracking.

Now, the situation you've painted with 12 "tie" variants on the mat seems exaggerated to me. Aces, in general range from 12-20 points at best maybe allowing 10 on the mat, maybe if they took an ace and a standard they could fill in 12 separate squadrons, but seeing as every squad over 13 points drastically reduces that probability you're likely looking at an average of 4-8 aces with 2-4 standards averaging at 8-10 on the mat for ace heavy fleets and 8-12 standards to 2-3 aces for about 10 with standard heavy builds...

If your situation is literal, then yes, the squadron plate does not help your opponent or you, but in 100+ games I have never seen anything like that. Ever.

In a more realistic setting, where squadron balls have 1 or 2 aces to boost the power of about 6 to 8 standards

You'd have, on average, 3-4 colors and 3-4 plates....

A great example is pictured in the tutorial above.

1x ACE in black
4x ties in blue
2x Intel in purple

If we wanted to add to that to display a full 134 fighter wing lets add soontir and saber plus 3 interceptors

That still only equates to 4 colors....

3x ACES in black
3x Interceptors in "red" (lets say)
4x ties in blue
2x intel in purple

Very easy to maintain, both visually and mentally.

Boiling down to the issue at hand, tracking that squadron damage.

I hear a lot of folks say they NEED to see it at a moments notice, or that they need to be secretive when checking squadron HP. Which I feel, again, becomes humorous under any real scrutiny...

The only time I have ever had difficulty remembering what squads did what is when there's more than 4 of the same type. (that includes aces of different types. Aces would be the one area I'd agree tracking COULD become a serious annoyance, so... no reekian aces players should use these...) For example I got hit with a full 16 ties once. I couldn't remember or discern **** without looking, but here's the beauty, that same 16 ties, when broken out into 4 colors through these plates, was easy to remember. Even with all that said, if my opponent is placing the plate on the mat during my turn, tracking is no longer an issue. Plain and simple.

Addressing the idea of being secretive. What game are they playing where an opponent is surprised when they target their squads? It's not like they hold a ton of mystery. The keywords make it almost laughable to suggest there's some secret strategy... If squads are in play.... your opponent has considered you may shoot them... you're not surprising anyone.


I have to step away from this post, as I feel like I'm probably sounding like an ***hole because I've become frustrated with answering the same question, so this will be my last post here.

I've designed these, tested these, shipped over 80 of them across the US without a single recipient complaining of any of these issues even once. The concerns over tracking have been raised since day one, and I've assured people it doesn't change the game enough to increase the difficulty or even time invested. Yet, these concerns are constantly echoed. It occurs to me, that seeing these concerns raised again and again even after a detailed step by step visual tutorial, indicates an aversion to change more than the systems difficulty of use.... I'm not going to invest the time to try to change someone's fears, I have no control over those. If you do not like these plates, I hold no grudge against you for not ordering them, but I will maintain that if you come across them at a casual or relaxed level, you should give them a chance to change your mind.

With that said, i wish the reader well and i hope to hear from you soon.


(channeling my inner C3P0 today)

After much consideration, my only remaining issue with these is simply tourney legality. Hmm. May have to get a couple to test drive myself.

On 6/8/2017 at 7:15 AM, Darth Sanguis said:

I don't mean to insult if it's not the case, but by "Aspy brain" do you mean Asperger's?

Yeah. I can have a hard time sorting through all the inputs in a game of Armada as is (on my bad days), so adding another set, and something that isn't consistently there, feels like it would exacerbate that.

4 hours ago, Admiral Theia said:

Yeah. I can have a hard time sorting through all the inputs in a game of Armada as is (on my bad days), so adding another set, and something that isn't consistently there, feels like it would exacerbate that.

I see. As it so happens, I'm in the same boat. Though there are many different ways it manifests, one of the aspects that's seems universally relevant is an aversion to change. While that may or may not be true for this individual situation, I would suggest, (from my own experience with Aspergers) that you not turn them down out of hand. I've found that separating units by colors has helped track, though it may seem counterintuitive, they may help.

Either way, they're not for everyone, but I firmly uphold that the perceived difficulty in tracking comes from a lack of 1st hand experience with them. If you ever see 'em, give 'em a chance to change your mind.

1 hour ago, Darth Sanguis said:

I see. As it so happens, I'm in the same boat. Though there are many different ways it manifests, one of the aspects that's seems universally relevant is an aversion to change. While that may or may not be true for this individual situation, I would suggest, (from my own experience with Aspergers) that you not turn them down out of hand. I've found that separating units by colors has helped track, though it may seem counterintuitive, they may help.

Either way, they're not for everyone, but I firmly uphold that the perceived difficulty in tracking comes from a lack of 1st hand experience with them. If you ever see 'em, give 'em a chance to change your mind.

If it's casual I likely will.