15 minutes ago, Blail Blerg said:

Wanted to chime in on this: While I do not think "if the tool overlaps asteroids, you should take damage", I think that generally, rocks take up too little space in this game, and make maneuvering too easy and loose.

I also think that squadrons should take 1 damage whenever they end a move onto an obstacle, however, I haven't been able to seriously test this to see if it improves the game or not. I understand very much that rock hiding is a big part of the squadron game currently. (Please, before anyone insinuates again that I don't play squadrons.)

Well I'll like this for the first half of the post.

FWIW, I think 'rock hiding' is one of the few things (along with relay) that this game "gets" about squadrons that is absolutely right . Like...feels like it perfectly nails, thematically, how squadrons work off of carriers, and especially how fighters work in the Star Wars universe. And, heck, it also doubles nicely to explain why every game of X-Wing is always in an asteroid field, heh - because that's the only spot you'd run INTO another squadron...when you are both hiding in a bunch o' rocks.

(Also: playing so much Wing Commander and Freespace 2 back in the day, the whole 'hiding in an asteroid field waiting for target ships to come past' thing is just... joy . I do love that so much.)

I do quite like the half points for damaged fortresses thing, but with Armada basically going the route of "Empire= more hull, Rebels= more (combined) shields", setting an absolute like "4 damage" seems a bit off the mark for me.

Giving points for half hull keeps the game's balance in mind, as it represents "crippling" a ship (as in, needs serious repairs) instead of letting ships surviving largely on hull- markedly ISDs- suffer arbitrarily.

As for the movement template not counting towards damage- I always thought that obstacles in Armada represented larger clusters of dangerous terrain instead of individual hazards. Meaning: The smaller you are, the easier you can squeeze through.

Since capital ships aren't placed on the other end of the template like in X-Wing, the base trails behind, meaning that there is actually not that much of the maneuver tool that the ship actually "clears", thus negating the need to take the template as a representation of the flight path. A large ship even at speed 3 doesn't move it's back edge far from where it's front edge used to be.

1 minute ago, xanderf said:

Well I'll like this for the first half of the post.

FWIW, I think 'rock hiding' is one of the few things (along with relay) that this game "gets" about squadrons that is absolutely right . Like...feels like it perfectly nails, thematically, how squadrons work off of carriers, and especially how fighters work in the Star Wars universe. And, heck, it also doubles nicely to explain why every game of X-Wing is always in an asteroid field, heh - because that's the only spot you'd run INTO another squadron...when you are both hiding in a bunch o' rocks.

(Also: playing so much Wing Commander and Freespace 2 back in the day, the whole 'hiding in an asteroid field waiting for target ships to come past' thing is just... joy . I do love that so much.)

Well, I'll comment on your second half post as well. Xwing ships do not generally like rock fighting. It also would make squadron fights more difficult I think. But again, before anyone rages, I haven't tested it.

26 minutes ago, Blail Blerg said:

Well, I'll comment on your second half post as well. Xwing ships do not generally like rock fighting. It also would make squadron fights more difficult I think. But again, before anyone rages, I haven't tested it.

And lorewise, we see TIEs get pounded to paste in an asteroid field, C-3PO freaks out, Han makes it through because he's Han, etc. Asteroid fields are shown as really dangerous. There seem to be two competing values: flavor and balance. Would it be immersive and awesome for ship damage to impact scoring, or for squads to take obstacle damage? Totally. Are there legitimate balance reasons why that shouldn't happen? Seems like it. For instance, if Demo APTs and rams Admo, it's reduced to half hull. Assuming Admo can run that wouldn't be a complete disaster normally, but when it's worth 30 points that hurts (and then there's Luke tagging ships, and expensive aces like Soontir being unwilling to touch obstacles at all.)

1 hour ago, xanderf said:

Oh, I agree. And as with the partial-point thing, too - not sure there is really any "easy fix" to either thing. Just...as they are ...it's weird.

(I mean, heck, I wouldn't at all hate just moving a ship step-at-a-time down the template checking for any obstacle or ship collision at each notch - but this would be increasing complexity a bit, and I think people would read it as too much of a buff to ships moving at speed-1)

I've never played X-Wing, but I have seen the movements tools. Those tools more or less represent the exact path a fighter is travelling. While in Armada, the tools represent the inertia a ship has while travelling. This is how you have ISDs swing their rear out wide since movement is determined by the front, or have a CR90 gliding past enemy ships at speed 4.

This is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. This inside turn does no represent the ISD going to notch 1 and overlapping, and then to notch 2 and coming out of the debris. It's actually representing the slowly moving and peeling to the left. It if were at a dead stop and the engines turn on and the ship starts to turn, this is more or less the move you get. This is why freighter ships needs tugboats to adjust them. Their movements are so long and slow they can't adjust on their own.

Half Points for ships would seriously throw things out of whack though - the Engineering command would become FAR more valuable. Now when your ISD has only 6 damage on it, turn 6, you NEED to have an Engineering command show up or else.

Half points would hurt large ships a lot I feel.

If i wanted to play xwing, i would have kept playimg xwing. I don't, therefore why try to make 2 completely different games similar to each other. Just because games are made by a similar company doesn't mean they have to share rulea. Wouldn't we complain if the games were too similar?

One of thw things i prefer about armada is the designers actually seem to care about how the game's rules affect gameplay and have put forethought into the rulea and their interactions.

Let's please keep that snake out of this garden.

35 minutes ago, Undeadguy said:

I've never played X-Wing, but I have seen the movements tools. Those tools more or less represent the exact path a fighter is travelling. While in Armada, the tools represent the inertia a ship has while travelling. This is how you have ISDs swing their rear out wide since movement is determined by the front, or have a CR90 gliding past enemy ships at speed 4.

This is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. This inside turn does no represent the ISD going to notch 1 and overlapping, and then to notch 2 and coming out of the debris. It's actually representing the slowly moving and peeling to the left. It if were at a dead stop and the engines turn on and the ship starts to turn, this is more or less the move you get. This is why freighter ships needs tugboats to adjust them. Their movements are so long and slow they can't adjust on their own.

Sure, but...I mean, there has got to be some middle ground...

Just now, xanderf said:

Sure, but...I mean, there has got to be some middle ground...

At this point we may as well exclaim Armada doesn't portray the films at all.

Commander: "Why did we not fire on that CR90?! It was right in front of us!!"

Officer: "Well it had last/first activation sir. There was nothing we could do."

Movement is a mechanic. Armada has it's own movement. X-Wing has it's own movement. There is no middle ground and no reason to combine them. If you did, movement would be a cluster ****.

I mean, if we're adding stuff in from other FFG games, let's add in the plot cards from Game of Thrones, the ability to go outside my faction based on my influence from Netrunner, and the ability in Legion to move UP TO my full distance (or anywhere along the line if I want) from Legion?

I mean, this seems fair to ME.

21 minutes ago, geek19 said:

I mean, if we're adding stuff in from other FFG games, let's add in the plot cards from Game of Thrones, the ability to go outside my faction based on my influence from Netrunner, and the ability in Legion to move UP TO my full distance (or anywhere along the line if I want) from Legion?

I mean, this seems fair to ME.

I've wanted undead archers from Runewars to be usable in armada for a while so I guess if I get that type of undead faction I don't need CIS to be added...

8 minutes ago, dominosfleet said:

I've wanted undead archers from Runewars to be usable in armada for a while so I guess if I get that type of undead faction I don't need CIS to be added...

Only if they're packaged with something from Descent....

5 minutes ago, geek19 said:

Only if they're packaged with something from Descent....

OMG I COULD USE THEM IN TWILIGHT IMPERIUM!!!1!!

Just now, dominosfleet said:

OMG I COULD USE THEM IN TWILIGHT IMPERIUM!!!1!!

Nope. No twilight imperium allowed. Why? It's gonna cut into the Tron/Rex crossover game/fan fiction I created. Spoiler alert: special guest star is Aslan from The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe.

That went off the rails fast...

1 minute ago, Ardaedhel said:

That went off the rails fast...

No, no, Ticket to Ride is a completely different game company.

52 minutes ago, Undeadguy said:

At this point we may as well exclaim Armada doesn't portray the films at all.

Commander: "Why did we not fire on that CR90?! It was right in front of us!!"

Officer: "Well it had last/first activation sir. There was nothing we could do."

This is actually the funniest thing I've read all day. Thanks for the laugh!

10 minutes ago, geek19 said:

No, no, Ticket to Ride is a completely different game company.

Both owned by Asmodee, now.

Xanderf, do you recall why x-wing introduced the half points rule for large ships? Large ship point fortresses are not dominating the meta in the same way.

7 minutes ago, Cactus said:

Xanderf, do you recall why x-wing introduced the half points rule for large ships? Large ship point fortresses are not dominating the meta in the same way.

That F'n Donut.

Edit: actually it was prob the double falcon lists that did it back in the before time in the long long ago.

8 minutes ago, svelok said:

Both owned by Asmodee, now.

My fanfiction is going to be so epic now, it'll make @BiggsIRL 's Minister Tua one look like Twilight to my 50 shades of grey!

58 minutes ago, dominosfleet said:

That F'n Donut.

Edit: actually it was prob the double falcon lists that did it back in the before time in the long long ago.

This was the dark times. The supremacy of 360 shooting turrets with too many dice on a large base that moved WAYYY too easily, with too many upgrades, too high PS, and literally zero hard counters to this day.

1 hour ago, geek19 said:

My fanfiction is going to be so epic now, it'll make @BiggsIRL 's Minister Tua one look like Twilight to my 50 shades of grey!

So...we're adding Lovecraftian stuff now too? I mean, why not, that's a game FFG makes too.