7 hours ago, TheEasternKing said:

They had artificial gravity? in that tiny space fighter? which only has thrusters firing in one direction on it? Accept that Starwars has very little to do with science, and a lot to do with magic and David and Goliath.

And a Star Destroyer has shields, shields powered by massive shield generators and reactors, no fighter/bomber is going to be able to overcome them, they are designed for Capital class ship weaponry.

The only way a fighter/bomber would be able to do anything to a Capital class ship like a Star Destroyer is because another Capital class ship had crippled it first. Because as I said, if a poxy snub fighter costing a pittance can take out your super duper expensive Battleship reliably and regularly, they would not ever be made nor used.

Learn to canon. It'll save you a lot of heartbreak in the end.

So because I disagree about people justifying WWII tactics for a space opera based game, I'm admiral Nelson?

Ok then.

Star destroyers weren't only made for capital ship combat. One of the things they excel in is orbital bombardment, and also, it can carry A LOT of stormtroopers. So they are much better at applying planetary pressure than smaller vessels, and generally having more than one ISD is better for a blockade than several smaller ships.

40 minutes ago, TheEasternKing said:

So because I disagree about people justifying WWII tactics for a space opera based game, I'm admiral Nelson?

Ok then.

I'm admiral nelson too apparently. People love to use that insult, especially when asked specifically not to.

11 hours ago, Hastatior said:

Sweetheart, I know from squadron tactics.

Where this is useful is when you are facing one of those Reeikan relay death contingents. the squads need to be at range 1 to shoot you, they need to be distance 3 of a relay to continue getting commands from transports that are running away from everything, they like to be distance 3 of Toryn Farr and they like to be in range of Bomber command. Having to check off all those boxes and still be far enough apart from each other to make triggering an AOE counter not worth it is a much more interesting proposition. As for going toe to toe with squadrons against this set up, go ahead and try it. Enjoy wasting your time with zombie escorts tying YOU down. With their relay their squads are more responsive and they activate almost every squad every round with almost no balancing downside (3 transports plus yavaris all of whom can be sitting in a corner away from all your stuff), this is why aceholes vs aceholes is like watching paint dry in slow motion. Its like watching 2 pillows have a pillow fight. You will find it so effective to try and kill something only to have a fighter activated to your spot, shoot you, adar taloned, activated by yavaris next activation, shoot you twice and look at that you aren't tying anything up because you are dead and all you managed to do was delay 1 xwing ace 1 round. Good investment.

Yeah. I'm getting pretty tired of the condescending advice we get.

Heck, I've played 20+ games of anti-mass-Rieekan against regional winners and whatever. Frankly. I bet I can PLAY Rieekan better than these people awho are telling me to learn to use shtt upgrades.

10 hours ago, Undeadguy said:

Your suggestion and experience involves CC which is played differently than tournaments. Translating strategies that work in CC, which also has a higher point cap, does not work so well in tournaments where you need to maximize your points instead of just having more points than your opponent.

You're talking past each other, not at each other.

Very much this.

ISDs still do well as gunships, but they need to be light on upgrades and have a decent support network.

7 minutes ago, Destraa said:

ISDs still do well as gunships, but they need to be light on upgrades and have a decent support network.

But how can they have guns if they never showed a single shot in the movies?!?! I mean, every frame we get is of a squadron doing massive massive damage to a ship 1000 times its size!

I mean, let's not forget that hot staredown Ackbar and the SSD had before that single kamikaze Awing took out the SSD.

2 hours ago, Blail Blerg said:

But how can they have guns if they never showed a single shot in the movies?!?! I mean, every frame we get is of a squadron doing massive massive damage to a ship 1000 times its size!

I mean, let's not forget that hot staredown Ackbar and the SSD had before that single kamikaze Awing took out the SSD.

They has shots fired in the movies, they can be seen exchanging fire against a Neb-B on the battle of Endor

54 minutes ago, Blail Blerg said:

But how can they have guns if they never showed a single shot in the movies?!?! I mean, every frame we get is of a squadron doing massive massive damage to a ship 1000 times its size!

I mean, let's not forget that hot staredown Ackbar and the SSD had before that single kamikaze Awing took out the SSD.

Clearly there is the iconic opening of New Hope of a CR90 vs Devastator. We can turn the topic on its head and say that Devastator is the only ISD with guns. Also did a check on Battle of Endor and there is one shot of a Neb and ISD trading broadsides with each other.

As for the current complaints at game state. I will admit I'm upset FFG has not previewed quad batteries cause it could be a curve ball. It could be Gunship tech that punishes scatter.

Interesting thing is if your exaggeration of only playing floats with squads was the end all be all then the German player from two worlds ago who brought nothing but gozantis and bombers should have won. If my memory is correct he made top 8 but not top 4. Also CC and Wave 5 dont help that list out much as you end up sacrificing too many bombers to fit any new tech in.

Why do you keep saying that capital ships never trade blow with each other in the Movies... they do so repeatedly over and over and over... it just happens in the background where the movies usually focus the action on the fighters, that is just typical Star Wars theme.

In the game an ISD can take tremendous damage from Squadrons if that is the only thing attacking it, far more than they usually does in the Movies or Series. Consider that a squadron is roughly 12 fighters they can take wave after wave without even being lightly damaged.

The old movies have less ships to ship combat but that is more likely a technical issues from special effect and nothing about ships not firing at each other. You see far more ship to ship firing in the newer movies, most of which are in the background.

If you could make a competitive list without squadrons in it the game would not resemble Star Wars anymore and you could put any toy ships on your stands or none at all and just use the game mechanic and push the stands around the board. The Star Wars theme would be gone.

I guess though that if the tournament mindset is all you have then I understand that it is only a game to you where theme don't matter. Playing the game with the same named stuff on both sides are already detached from the theme so from that angle I understand. But I think most people can differentiate between narrative play and tournament play, but not all can I presume.

All whining is Admiral Nelson:

Episode 4: A New Hope AKA "but I was going to the Nelson station to pick up some Admiral Converters"

Episode 5: "your Admiral will freeze before you reach the first marker!" "Then I'll see you in Nelson!"

Episode 6: "your faith in your Admiral is your weakness." "Your faith in your Nelson is yours"

that said, at the end of the day we are all more or less grown (?) people playing with plastic PEW PEW PEW toys

If you really think I, of all people, believe that capital ships have no guns, then ye never knew me.

5 hours ago, Blail Blerg said:

But how can they have guns if they never showed a single shot in the movies?!?! I mean, every frame we get is of a squadron doing massive massive damage to a ship 1000 times its size!

I mean, let's not forget that hot staredown Ackbar and the SSD had before that single kamikaze Awing took out the SSD.

What the others have said, but also Devastator ripping apart the Rebel Fleet over Scarif, and before that the other two ISDs contributing to their demise. Again, fleet combat is shown, but since all the main characters are in starfighters, it makes sense that it's in the background and easily miss-able.

I, for one, really like the suggestion to remove all dice from capital ships in Armada. Or at least remove all the red dices. I really don't care about the weak blue and black Dices.

12 minutes ago, GhostofNobodyInParticular said:

What the others have said, but also Devastator ripping apart the Rebel Fleet over Scarif, and before that the other two ISDs contributing to their demise. Again, fleet combat is shown, but since all the main characters are in starfighters, it makes sense that it's in the background and easily miss-able.

36 minutes ago, Blail Blerg said:

If you really think I, of all people, believe that capital ships have no guns, then ye never knew me.

But I'm glad we found some evidence for those that were arguing that capital ships actually don't attack anything and it was all fighters.

Man this was productive.

1 minute ago, Blail Blerg said:

But I'm glad we found some evidence for those that were arguing that capital ships actually don't attack anything and it was all fighters.

Man this was productive.

Admittedly, I don't know you, so I can only answer what you post. Furthermore, those that read your posts may not know you, and so may believe what you say. Therefore, I shall post, regardless of your actual thoughts so long as they are unexpressed, the alternative position, pointing out that what you are saying is in fact wrong. That way, those reading may realize that it is hyperbole.

And again - there is no evidence for capital ships not attacking something. If you are referring to my posts, then I was pointing out instances of capital ships attacking other ships (i.e. the exact opposite of what you are saying), so I am confused by your statement.

6 hours ago, Visovics said:

Star destroyers weren't only made for capital ship combat. One of the things they excel in is orbital bombardment, and also, it can carry A LOT of stormtroopers. So they are much better at applying planetary pressure than smaller vessels, and generally having more than one ISD is better for a blockade than several smaller ships.

I just figured they were not so much better for a blockade but can do all the things needed for a blockade better then smaller ships. ISDs are one of the most versatile ships in sci-fi able to be carrier, battleship and a troop transport all while being excellent in all three roles.

1 hour ago, chr335 said:

I just figured they were not so much better for a blockade but can do all the things needed for a blockade better then smaller ships. ISDs are one of the most versatile ships in sci-fi able to be carrier, battleship and a troop transport all while being excellent in all three rolesAnd they get even more versatile in EU with gravity well generators and artillery-range turbolasers.

This is high quality sh*tposting. Keks be upon you Blail.

That said, I am very confident issues with Rieekan are going to be addressed by FFG.

17 hours ago, TheEasternKing said:

So because I disagree about people justifying WWII tactics for a space opera based game, I'm admiral Nelson?

Ok then.

*shrug* What you want and what is are not the same thing. Apply the basic tenets of observation to the canonical depictions of the Star Wars universe and you'll derive several key facts:

1) Fighters are a threat to capitol ships. From the A-Wings raiding the SSD's shield generator to Little Annie blowing up the droid ship, they are apparently a major weapon in interstellar warfare. They may not be the QUICKEST way to kill enemy capships (in Rebels 320, Thrawn is ordered to capture the leaders alive and sends in fighters to do it rather than crushing them with a half-dozen ISDs), but they DO kill capships.

2) The only counter to fighters are other fighters. AA fire in Star Wars is anemic and unreliable, and apparently a large part of tactical doctrine is intercepting enemy bombers with your own fighters while your capships close to effective firing range.

3) Therefore, a big part of any fleet-based battle game using Star Wars IP has to represent fighters as a serious threat to capships, with the only way to really fight them off being fighters of your own.

Arguments about WWII and antigravity and other things are by the side - the key point is, "Does Star Wars Armada represent what we've observed? Yes."

WANTING the game to be about the big ships is a valid desire, and there do exist other space battle games which have that. HOWEVER, if it was just about the capships with squadrons being an afterthought, Star Wars Armada would be a deeply flawed representation of the intellectual property. You and @Blail Blerg are wrong. Just plain incorrect. If your viewpoint prevailed, then it wouldn't be Star Wars as we've seen it in every canon source - it'd be another game using Star Wars shaped ships. I'm not sure how to state it clearer than that.

Right now it IS a bit tilted too far towards squadrons (and I think the key mistake there is the Intel keyword, as well as flotillas), but that's a matter for tinkering with the game balance, not removing a vital part of the game which parallels the IP exactly.

As far as the ISD thing goes...

ISDs are not built for interstellar warfare - why would they be? The New Order controls the entire galaxy! They are projections of Imperial might first and foremost, carrying an army of foot soldiers and an ungodly amount of fighters, but ALSO have enough firepower to slug it out with other ships and reduce planetary surface targets to slag. Interstellar warfare is not a massive part of their design portfolio, and the fact that it's even moderately good at is is a sign of sensible designers.

11 minutes ago, iamfanboy said:

ISDs are not built for interstellar warfare - why would they be? The New Order controls the entire galaxy! They are projections of Imperial might first and foremost, carrying an army of foot soldiers and an ungodly amount of fighters, but ALSO have enough firepower to slug it out with other ships and reduce planetary surface targets to slag. Interstellar warfare is not a massive part of their design portfolio, and the fact that it's even moderately good at is is a sign of sensible designers.

I disagree about ISDs not being designed for interstellar combat. I think crew training was shifted away from ship to ship combat in favor of blockades and planetary assault (at least until after the battle of yavin). I mean other then a few pockets of CIS droids the largest the imperial navy would deal with were pirate operated frigates and heavy smuggler freighters.

34 minutes ago, iamfanboy said:

WANTING the game to be about the big ships is a valid desire, and there do exist other space battle games which have that. HOWEVER, if it was just about the capships with squadrons being an afterthought, Star Wars Armada would be a deeply flawed representation of the intellectual property. You and @Blail Blerg are wrong. Just plain incorrect. If your viewpoint prevailed, then it wouldn't be Star Wars as we've seen it in every canon source - it'd be another game using Star Wars shaped ships. I'm not sure how to state it clearer than that.

I have another post talking about this

But to summarize, the further you zoom out from the battle, the less the smaller parts become relevant. Squads are relevant in Armada as represented in many fleet skirmishes throughout the canon, however that's because the scale of the conflict is small enough to give them detail. As I say in my post I think there should be a new game or new game mode for people who want to see ship combat from a slightly larger scale.

Like the opening of Episode III

12 minutes ago, Darth Sanguis said:

What's that ship in the bottom right corner?

1 minute ago, chr335 said:

I disagree about ISDs not being designed for interstellar combat. I think crew training was shifted away from ship to ship combat in favor of blockades and planetary assault (at least until after the battle of yavin). I mean other then a few pockets of CIS droids the largest the imperial navy would deal with were pirate operated frigates and heavy smuggler freighters.

Well, their keels were first laid down after the Clone War was over. It makes sense for them to be more multirole, and the canon descriptions fit that to a tee; that's probably also why the ISD-IIs are more combat ready because the Imperial Navy found out that Impstar-I's simply weren't cutting it. Whether or not it's CANON, I can't say; but observation says that ISD-I's weren't great at combat because their focus was on multiple roles, and ISD-IIs started hitting the design phase once that fact was realized.

11 minutes ago, Darth Sanguis said:

I have another post talking about this

But to summarize, the further you zoom out from the battle, the less the smaller parts become relevant. Squads are relevant in Armada as represented in many fleet skirmishes throughout the canon, however that's because the scale of the conflict is small enough to give them detail. As I say in my post I think there should be a new game or new game mode for people who want to see ship combat from a slightly larger scale.

Like the opening of Episode III

With any game, the amount of abstraction is an issue. If you wanted to put together a game where, say, an ISD was on a 20mmx40mm base (half the width of an X-Wing base) and that was the standard size for big ships, you COULD do massive fleet battles with dozens of ships on a side - the current small ships would be on 20mmx10mm bases, mediums would be on 30mmx15mm, and larges would match the ISDs.

But how much detail would you be able to fit into such a small scale game? Most ships would have a single shield/hull value, there might be one or two zones for firing (probably an "In arc/out of arc" situation much like X-Wing, except your firepower would be greatly reduced if you were out of arc, and arcs would be different sizes and placements), and at that scale fighters would be... how? Probably just represented by additional firepower.

And I might be all for that - if that Battle for Coruscant were a typical example of Star Wars fleet engagements. But it seems as though more than 10 ships on a side is the exception, rather than the rule. While the Empire may have 25,000 Imperial Star Destroyers, it has millions of star systems to rule, and one of those with a few smaller ships may be all that maintains control over a thousand star systems. And yes, the Rebellion may have the luxury of concentrating its firepower, but it rarely seems to have more than a handful of capships at any one time.

So, for the most part, Armada represents in-universe battles well. If you want to play a bigger game than the engine can ordinarily handle (like a 2,000 point game) it's possible, but overall the engine is scaled well for 3-6 ships and some small craft support.