49 minutes ago, Yosh6314 said:

Wow this thread has been derailed.

This is true. To be fair, the derail was suggested by a comment up-thread that the 'something big' was an Armada 2.0 that would streamline the game to make it play faster to appeal to the X-Wing crowd. Which started nesting discussions, and here we are.

I've fired up a dedicated thread to discuss the tournament format change idea - it is taking up too much room, here, agreed!

Quote

*Insert crazed chanting* SSD! SSD! SSD!

Well I'll always give THAT an upvote!

Something big... coming...

insert meme with picture of the deathstart above scarif......+

Something big is coming and its...

a mouse droid as an officer.

1 minute ago, sgtdeadman said:

a mouse droid as an officer.

Mouse Droid

Empire only.

Your ship gains the [Support Team] upgrade slot.

You cannot equip this upgrade if you already have the [Support Team] upgrade slot.

29 minutes ago, Indy_com said:

Mouse Droid

Empire only.

Your ship gains the [Support Team] upgrade slot.

You cannot equip this upgrade if you already have the [Support Team] upgrade slot.

Because Engine Teching BTVengers are what we need...

Just now, Drasnighta said:

Because Engine Teching BTVengers are what we need...

If the mouse droid takes up the officer slot, then at least Avenger dosen't have Tua and, by extension, ECMs.

Just now, Indy_com said:

If the mouse droid takes up the officer slot, then at least Avenger dosen't have Tua and, by extension, ECMs.

Only if it’s a 1 and not a Kuat

Just now, Drasnighta said:

Only if it’s a 1 and not a Kuat

The first thought that came to mind for a mouse droid officer was something which prevents the discarding of a weapons team slot.

An Avenger that can do boarding troopers twice is probably more dangerous than an engine teching Avenger...

mouse droids were also used for delivering stuff... so why not messages....

officer slot, discard this upgrade to change your 2nd or 3rd command dial 2 pts

... so no help this turn but can help fix then next turn

1 hour ago, Drasnighta said:

Because Engine Teching BTVengers are what we need...

*starts salivating at the tought of a Kuat BTVenger with Engine Techs*

I don't understand why people want a shorter gameplay, if they change the gameplay to mimick X-Wing, it will feel more like FPS and I don't think that goes well with overall concept of Armada which is Admirals commanding the huge battlefield.

X-Wing is nice but if people liked the pace of the game they would have already played X-Wing rather than Armada.

I think Armada needs bigger battles with bigger fleets with possibility of more players joining as they have done in CC, FFG needs to find better mechanisms to work that out.

3 hours ago, LostFleet said:

I don't understand why people want a shorter gameplay, if they change the gameplay to mimick X-Wing, it will feel more like FPS and I don't think that goes well with overall concept of Armada which is Admirals commanding the huge battlefield.

X-Wing is nice but if people liked the pace of the game they would have already played X-Wing rather than Armada.

I think Armada needs bigger battles with bigger fleets with possibility of more players joining as they have done in CC, FFG needs to find better mechanisms to work that out.

Right, but many players also want to play in tournaments, and some might argue that the game is pretty darned long for tournaments.

1 hour ago, Mikael Hasselstein said:

Right, but many players also want to play in tournaments, and some might argue that the game is pretty darned long for tournaments.

Some would argue that those sone arguing have been spoiled by skirmish game tournaments.... ?

I mean, I fully admit my position is biased... especially helping out in the past with the 40k Victorian Grand Prix if tournaments that were all 2 day events culminating in the Arcanacon 2 dayer of 7-8 games each of 2+ hours.

Some game systems just.... take time to play.

To me... Armada isn’t the slowest game I’ve run Tournaments for...

12 hours ago, LostFleet said:

I don't understand why people want a shorter gameplay, if they change the gameplay to mimick X-Wing, it will feel more like FPS and I don't think that goes well with overall concept of Armada which is Admirals commanding the huge battlefield.

X-Wing is nice but if people liked the pace of the game they would have already played X-Wing rather than Armada.

I think Armada needs bigger battles with bigger fleets with possibility of more players joining as they have done in CC, FFG needs to find better mechanisms to work that out.

Not about shorter gameplay. It’s about getting players to move it a bit. In a game that goes to time a player can literally sit there and do nothing for 30+minutes (personal experience on this one). In a practical sense, there really isn’t a reason for turns to take so long with such a low model count.

Don’t get me wrong either. I love armada. I love the strategy and thought behind making moves. Right now , you can basically take five minutes to sit there before you move a ship. IMO it’s too much.

10 hours ago, Drasnighta said:

Some would argue that those sone arguing have been spoiled by skirmish game tournaments.... ?

I mean, I fully admit my position is biased... especially helping out in the past with the 40k Victorian Grand Prix if tournaments that were all 2 day events culminating in the Arcanacon 2 dayer of 7-8 games each of 2+ hours.

Some game systems just.... take time to play.

To me... Armada isn’t the slowest game I’ve run Tournaments for...

Sure, but so what? The shorter the time footprint, the more people there will be who can make the time to make it to the tournament.

For my part, I like a game that's flexible enough to be played in different ways. At some point standard play becomes boring, but it is also something on which people can easily agree, and it also levels the playing field for tournaments. While tournaments are certainly not everyone's favorite style of play (as it is not mine), they are nevertheless the way in which the largest share of the community finds itself as part of a larger community. Anything that helps that be what it is most efficiently is worth looking at, IMO.

6 minutes ago, Mikael Hasselstein said:

Sure, but so what? The shorter the time footprint, the more people there will be who can make the time to make it to the tournament.

For my part, I like a game that's flexible enough to be played in different ways. At some point standard play becomes boring, but it is also something on which people can easily agree, and it also levels the playing field for tournaments. While tournaments are certainly not everyone's favorite style of play (as it is not mine), they are nevertheless the way in which the largest share of the community finds itself as part of a larger community. Anything that helps that be what it is most efficiently is worth looking at, IMO.

But at what point are we no longer playing the same game as each other?

9 minutes ago, Drasnighta said:

But at what point are we no longer playing the same game as each other?

At whatever point you decide that the Armada taxomy decrees that it is a difference of kind rather than degree. If you want to be strict about it, Armada standard play is the ONLY Armada. It's not like there are (m)any(?) generally-accepted variants of chess other than to include a time clock or not. For my part, however, Armada offers a great deal more latitude than chess does.

Quote

so where is the big thing you promised me?

quoting her.

Streamlining? Its not like Armada is hard and tricky where you need to look tables up regularly.

There are enough dumb down games getting around without the need to add to them

I think people are debating the necessity of a thing instead of my suggestion that a change to rulesets would qualify as a big release.

I only threw that in there because I know from talking with people who have a greater knowledge of what's going on behind the scenes that there have been many efforts to make the game run faster mechanically without sacrificing the strategic complexity. I also know that many people have directly identified the core set as a major hindrance to entering the game with it's extremely high price tag relative to content (the lowest ratio of models to money of any of FFG's $90 miniatures core sets).

8 minutes ago, thecactusman17 said:

...with it's extremely high price tag relative to content (the lowest ratio of models to money of any of FFG's $90 miniatures core sets).

Sure, if you think that Armada models are equivalent to the models of the other games. I'm not going to run any speculative math, but an average Armada model (incl. base) is a lot more intricate than your average X-Wing model, and certainly Imperial Assault and Legion model.

18 minutes ago, thecactusman17 said:

I think people are debating the necessity of a thing instead of my suggestion that a change to rulesets would qualify as a big release.

I only threw that in there because I know from talking with people who have a greater knowledge of what's going on behind the scenes that there have been many efforts to make the game run faster mechanically without sacrificing the strategic complexity.

Yes, changing the rules of the game would certainly qualify as 'something big', but do you honestly think that they're talking about that, rather than a big honking ship (for the Empire)?

8 hours ago, Geressen said:

quoting her.

I made a "that is what she said" joke but nobody got it

****... I've been waiting for a "that's what she said"-joke on the forum for quite a while... and then - indeed - I missed it...

"D#mn", gets automatically censored?

****!