We got an Objective Article?
Community Created Content.
People asked for it, as part of the great Letdown abatement...
...
FFG listened.
Aint it grand?
Hmmmmm I like the idea of the article. Its too wishy washy for me though
QuoteHe gives equal consideration to both factions, but at the table he would have himself taken away if he were ever a part of the Rebel Alliance and a traitor.
From my point of view, the Imperial Navy is evil.
Edited by rasproteus
Well, obviously this isn't a too complex, or very informative article, but I'm still glad that FFG listened and they give an article now and then. If they keep up at this rate, I'll be happy. Especially if there will be more guest contents
This isn’t the article we want right now, but the one we need...
I don't view this as an article for long time members of the community. I see it as an article that is promoting interest in getting new players reading and into Armada.
Generating news like this is a great way to get Armada back on the front page. I like it.
Edited by KarneckI'm fine if they outsource content to the community, but this article really feels like it was supposed to be released right after the core set came out. Truthiness and Crabbok had real new content on top of their own opinions so that's fun to read/watch, but ****, FFG is scraping the bottom for articles for Armada if this is what we look forward to.
It isn't always about people that have been playing since core...it is also about new players that might feel a little overwhelmed for objective selection.
35 minutes ago, Undeadguy said:I'm fine if they outsource content to the community, but this article really feels like it was supposed to be released right after the core set came out. Truthiness and Crabbok had real new content on top of their own opinions so that's fun to read/watch, but ****, FFG is scraping the bottom for articles for Armada if this is what we look forward to.
I'm just glad they're still paying attention to us, as THIS is what we yelled for. Plus, right now we don't have a lot to spoil or talk about that hasn't been talked to death.
Mainly though, I'm just glad we're getting stuff, like we requested.
Thumbs up on the article, because having a mix of articles for advanced players and for new and intermediate players is pretty important. Glad to see it.
When I read X-wing community content on the state of their meta, I go cross-eyed and quit about a third of the way through. I only have a passing interest because I've invested about $100 in X-wing and I'm just not interested in all those details. The X-wing aficionados probably had a pretty good discussion about it, but not me. Too much. Now, if they'd have posted an article on very basic mechanics, I'd have been reading with interest.
So I think it's good to have @JJs Juggernaut 's article on the vagaries of Thrawn play. I'll eat that up and love it! But I'll bet someone with only a new or passing interest in Armada would make it about one-third of the way through before they were lost. Enter Ian's article: perfect!
To paraphrase a wise player, it may not be the article the veteran players wanted, but it is an article the community as a whole needed.
Edited by RobertK1 hour ago, Norell said:Well, obviously this isn't a too complex, or very informative article, but I'm still glad that FFG listened and they give an article now and then. If they keep up at this rate, I'll be happy. Especially if there will be more guest contents
![]()
Agreed.
This is sort of an evergreen topic, objective play is one of the most misunderstood things for new players in this whole system. It just came up this week over in the rules board, which is a pretty frequent event. The more places official FFG stamped information on the subject is available, the better off new players will be.
yeah. I'm fine with the article as it is. It's not meant for us veteran players, but not everything is about us ya know. And putting up articles like this might just push some potential new players to dive in!
I know locally we have a lot of new players come into the game. I think at the point we are at all the "classic" star wars ships are there, and so a lot of new players are finding their way to the game right now. More than Ive seen in probably the last year.
Which is awesome! Game needs new blood! But also means we need stuff like this more than ever.
3 cheers for FFG for listening and acting.
It is good timing for an article for newer players (like me). The Barnes & Noble sales last month seems to have brought in a good number of new players to the game.
What I really think is funny, it's the fact that two month ago, everyone on this forum was hopping for something, even a little text.
Because we all tought (at this point) that we were let a little bit aside by FFG.
Now, all because of the release of the Wave 7 and all the content that we are chatting about, some people seams to forget for what they wish for.
Enjoy each article FFG is doing for Armada. This is only good news. Armada is not dead!!!
Thank's FFG and keep sending articles like this one... Do it
Edited by DOMSWAT911
It's a very objective objective article. I would prefer a more subjective objective article. That way the forum users can be subjective about the subjective article on objectives. Instead we have a subjective response to and objective article on objectives.
As a sort of noob here, I love ANY articles that will help me find a better way to understand and play this game. I have played various wargames since the late 70's so I'm totally ignorant of the basic ideas but Armada has some intricacies that most other games lack. That makes it both more fun/interesting and more challenging. Objectives are a big part of that difference. Articles like this one will go a long way toward brining in more new players who were afraid of the tiny plastic spaceships. I say keep it up.
This is such a great precedent for articles, I really appreciate that FFG is pushing Armada to new players with Wave 7 hitting shelves in a week. They need to keep up this steady drip feed for the period between waves too. Armada has slowly been growing, but as the new ships have become more visible in the last few weeks we've started seeing more and more new players in the local game stores and checking in on our regional facebook page.
Is it just me, or does that graphic make these obstacles appear to be moving WAY too far? Especially that debris field.
I'd agree with folks here saying it is nice to see articles like this targeting newer players and just keeping Armada in the news will help draw new players in and keep older ones. I also think it's appropriate to strike while the iron is hot, so-to-speak. I think this may be the most exciting Wave since wave 2.
3 hours ago, RobertK said:Thumbs up on the article, because having a mix of articles for advanced players and for new and intermediate players is pretty important. Glad to see it.
When I read X-wing community content on the state of their meta, I go cross-eyed and quit about a third of the way through. I only have a passing interest because I've invested about $100 in X-wing and I'm just not interested in all those details. The X-wing aficionados probably had a pretty good discussion about it, but not me. Too much. Now, if they'd have posted an article on very basic mechanics, I'd have been reading with interest.
So I think it's good to have @JJs Juggernaut 's article on the vagaries of Thrawn play. I'll eat that up and love it! But I'll bet someone with only a new or passing interest in Armada would make it about one-third of the way through before they were lost. Enter Ian's article: perfect!
To paraphrase a wise player, it may not be the article the veteran players wanted, but it is an article the community as a whole needed.
Sadly X Wing has become a collectable card game where building a killer combo of cards that came with ships that no member of the general public would associate with Star Wars has long been more important than dogfighting.
3 hours ago, AdmiralYor said:It's a very objective objective article. I would prefer a more subjective objective article. That way the forum users can be subjective about the subjective article on objectives. Instead we have a subjective response to and objective article on objectives.
Holy **** dude.
/thread right there.