1 hour ago, Crabbok said:

At least that would be news. I would happily play Armada 2.0 if it ever happens, as long as they keep the feel of the game mostly in tact. I love Armada more than any other game - the setup, the movement, the fleet positioning.... it's very exciting to me. Nothing else captures that feel.

It's very good. Definitely the best of the current ship games. I also like Dropfleet Commander; different, less well balanced, but fun with some nifty ideas, and of course BFG, which will likely get a reboot in the next few years as well. The old Babylon Wars systems were fun too..

Just now, Chemosh667 said:

It's very good. Definitely the best of the current ship games. I also like Dropfleet Commander; different, less well balanced, but fun with some nifty ideas, and of course BFG, which will likely get a reboot in the next few years as well. The old Babylon Wars systems were fun too..

I'm not going to lie, if/when BFG drops I might be done with armada. I want to love this game even if it hits me but maybe I'll learn.

1 minute ago, dominosfleet said:

I'm not going to lie, if/when BFG drops I might be done with armada. I want to love this game even if it hits me but maybe I'll learn.

I do miss doing up missile/torpedo flights and whatnot in BFG. The later years in Specialist Games' hands saw too many horribly unbalanced releases (Tau, Necrons, etc). But it was always a very fun game, like most GW games. I would definitely play both systems though; they were different takes on the genre, just like Dropfleet, and Armada is a much more well-balanced game (even with the squadrons, which I know people like to whine about; maybe doing squadrons more in-line with ships would be better, and having better/more functional interception mechanics or some such). GW games are vastly more expensive on average, so that is a consideration as well (Armada lower barrier to entry and lower ongoing costs).

3 minutes ago, Chemosh667 said:

I do miss doing up missile/torpedo flights and whatnot in BFG. The later years in Specialist Games' hands saw too many horribly unbalanced releases (Tau, Necrons, etc). But it was always a very fun game, like most GW games. I would definitely play both systems though; they were different takes on the genre, just like Dropfleet, and Armada is a much more well-balanced game (even with the squadrons, which I know people like to whine about; maybe doing squadrons more in-line with ships would be better, and having better/more functional interception mechanics or some such). GW games are vastly more expensive on average, so that is a consideration as well (Armada lower barrier to entry and lower ongoing costs).

I played 40k for 12ish years, ended up with 10 to 15 k necrons. I never played table top BFG but I always heard the horror stories about how frustrating they were to play against. While I'm sure they'll be dramatically more in line with the other fleets I'm still excited to fly those tomb crescents.

9 minutes ago, dominosfleet said:

I played 40k for 12ish years, ended up with 10 to 15 k necrons. I never played table top BFG but I always heard the horror stories about how frustrating they were to play against. While I'm sure they'll be dramatically more in line with the other fleets I'm still excited to fly those tomb crescents.

I was/am a longtime eldar player in 40k, epic (AT-1-2-TL), and BFG. Still poke at games occasionally, but mostly DFC/DZC and Armada these days (busy with kids and career stuff). Necrons were an insanely overpowered version of Eldar in BFG.

Anyways, back to Armada! Honestly, the only things that might be decent to cleanup I think are around squadron usage. Squadron phase I am not sure is actually necessary; I think finding a way to integrate more inline with normal ship operations may be doable, but honestly it does work the way it is alright (people just need to get over themselves and learn to love the bomb... -ers...). I would like to see a little better ability for ships to focus-fight against fighters, but then again in the movies ships kind of blow at taking on fighter swarms, so it's kind of a wash for me. It's fine, but other approaches may be nice to try/see as well...

Just now, Chemosh667 said:

I was/am a longtime eldar player in 40k, epic (AT-1-2-TL), and BFG. Still poke at games occasionally, but mostly DFC/DZC and Armada these days (busy with kids and career stuff). Necrons were an insanely overpowered version of Eldar in BFG.

Anyways, back to Armada! Honestly, the only things that might be decent to cleanup I think are around squadron usage. Squadron phase I am not sure is actually necessary; I think finding a way to integrate more inline with normal ship operations may be doable, but honestly it does work the way it is alright (people just need to get over themselves and learn to love the bomb... -ers...). I would like to see a little better ability for ships to focus-fight against fighters, but then again in the movies ships kind of blow at taking on fighter swarms, so it's kind of a wash for me. It's fine, but other approaches may be nice to try/see as well...

Hum, imagine if they merge squadron phase into ship phase similarly to how deployment works. "activate two squads in place of a ship". I'm not saying i WANT that to be a thing(I have no idea how squadron commands would work at that point) but I don't hate it.

Just now, dominosfleet said:

Hum, imagine if they merge squadron phase into ship phase similarly to how deployment works. "activate two squads in place of a ship". I'm not saying i WANT that to be a thing(I have no idea how squadron commands would work at that point) but I don't hate it.

As someone who tested it. You’d hate it.

Squads become so much better again.

1 minute ago, Drasnighta said:

As someone who tested it. You’d hate it.

Squads become so much better again.

Yeah, wasn't really what I had in mind. More like you could activate a number of squads in addition to a ship, or some such. The current system works fine.

19 minutes ago, Drasnighta said:

As someone who tested it. You’d hate it.

Squads become so much better again.

18 minutes ago, Chemosh667 said:

Yeah, wasn't really what I had in mind. More like you could activate a number of squads in addition to a ship, or some such. The current system works fine.

Oh I'm fine with the way it is, I love the squadron game.

15 hours ago, Crabbok said:

At least that would be news. I would happily play Armada 2.0 if it ever happens, as long as they keep the feel of the game mostly in tact. I love Armada more than any other game - the setup, the movement, the fleet positioning.... it's very exciting to me. Nothing else captures that feel.

Im with you on that. The only Problem with Armada 2.0 would be - that the thought of that it COULD happen, makes me wanna save on future "ship Investments". In X-wing i'm having the Problem of needing several "upgrade kits" in order to be able to field all my fighters (as Long as there is no market for additional ship Upgrades).

19 hours ago, Church14 said:

I can understand disagreement.

But man, the SSD is the most craptastically stupid thing they could implement in Armada. The implementation of epic play in XWMG was abysmal. Forcing players to buy a $70-$100 expansion to get top tier, tournament winning cards is horse****. I expect them to pull the exact same **** if they bring an SSD. That’s how they would tempt losing a significant portion of the player base. Not just because of the SSD, but because the implication that it would keep happening.

So no.

#NeverSSD

Fair enough. But I bet there are a lot more casual players than tourney players who enjoy themed games etc. It is just a game after all, not a serious sport.

I'm praying the "something big" isn't Armada 2.0.

X-wing 2.0 has already put me in a difficult spot; I'm increasingly of the opinion that the new edition isn't offering me anything beyond a £100+ bill to stay up-to-date. That said, I do understand that a lot of other players feel very strongly that the game needs a reset.

I don't see the same weight of opinion behind a new edition of Armada; indeed many players far more knowledgeable than myself seem to feel the game is in a decent state.

1 hour ago, Gallanteer said:

Fair enough. But I bet there are a lot more casual players than tourney players who enjoy themed games etc. It is just a game after all, not a serious sport.

Fair.

But pay to win is a quick way to lose players

12 minutes ago, Church14 said:

Fair.

But pay to win is a quick way to lose players

All comes down to whether you enjoy the game and the journey and aiming to win, or if winning is the only pleasurable part.

I get your point though. For example, Disposable Capacitors only being available in an Empire expansion when I exclusively play Rebels is also a pain. I guess thats what ebay or proxy versions are for. Even as a non-tournament player my OCD starts kicking in with proxys. Thats where XW 2ed seems to be being fixed as well.

If they only included cards for use on the SSD or cards already available elsewhere then that would be better for an SSD expansion. Doubt they'll do it that way though.

23 hours ago, Church14 said:

I can understand disagreement.

But man, the SSD is the most craptastically stupid thing they could implement in Armada. The implementation of epic play in XWMG was abysmal. Forcing players to buy a $70-$100 expansion to get top tier, tournament winning cards is horse****. I expect them to pull the exact same **** if they bring an SSD. That’s how they would tempt losing a significant portion of the player base. Not just because of the SSD, but because the implication that it would keep happening.

So no.

#NeverSSD

1, you don't design a capital ship game and leave out the 2nd most recognizable capital ship.

2, what exactly do you think the breakdown is on casual vs tournament players?

3, an SSD model under $200 will have Sales way beyond Armada players.

4, I hope they put the best cards exclusively in the SSD pack, as I plan on buying 2! Yeah me!

5, SWM20 is the SSD Executor!

33 minutes ago, cynanbloodbane said:

3, an SSD model under $200 will have Sales way beyond Armada players.

Bingo. While $100 may be rough for people to just start investing in a (kind of costly) miniatures game, I can see a lot of SW fans that do not play Armada or X-Wing buying this just to look awesome of their shelf. I’m sure that FFG knows this and isn’t going to waste an opportunity to make money.

The Force wouldn't make any sense in Amrada. There are only 2 squadrons and 3 (5?) cards that could benefit from using the Force. Of those only Vader as admiral sees any measurable time on the table, Ahsoka and Leia officer sometimes are there, but Leia admiral and Luke/Vader squadrons nearly never show up.

My main concern is that FFG cannot be THAT bad at marketing. They just can't screw up this much every possible way the marketing of Armada. Just count: The big press release is only about X-W 2.0, no news on May 4th, an infograph that uses misinformation to show how low Armada's popularity is... My guess is that they are deliberately trying to erode the reputation and the popularity of the game so they have an excuse to shut it down.

2 hours ago, Norell said:

The Force wouldn't make any sense in Amrada. There are only 2 squadrons and 3 (5?) cards that could benefit from using the Force. Of those only Vader as admiral sees any measurable time on the table, Ahsoka and Leia officer sometimes are there, but Leia admiral and Luke/Vader squadrons nearly never show up.

My main concern is that FFG cannot be THAT bad at marketing. They just can't screw up this much every possible way the marketing of Armada. Just count: The big press release is only about X-W 2.0, no news on May 4th, an infograph that uses misinformation to show how low Armada's popularity is... My guess is that they are deliberately trying to erode the reputation and the popularity of the game so they have an excuse to shut it down.

Only reason to go that is if the profit margin has gone to crap.

8 hours ago, Norell said:

The Force wouldn't make any sense in Amrada. There are only 2 squadrons and 3 (5?) cards that could benefit from using the Force. Of those only Vader as admiral sees any measurable time on the table, Ahsoka and Leia officer sometimes are there, but Leia admiral and Luke/Vader squadrons nearly never show up.

My main concern is that FFG cannot be THAT bad at marketing. They just can't screw up this much every possible way the marketing of Armada. Just count: The big press release is only about X-W 2.0, no news on May 4th, an infograph that uses misinformation to show how low Armada's popularity is... My guess is that they are deliberately trying to erode the reputation and the popularity of the game so they have an excuse to shut it down.

5 hours ago, cynanbloodbane said:

Only reason to go that is if the profit margin has gone to crap.

ya, pretty much. They're banking hardcore on Legion being a cash cow and sacrificing other brands to do so. Lol If I seem a bit bitter, this isn't the first time FFG has done something like this that I've been involved. I don't do much RP anymore, too much D&D as a kid to the point where all games feel sameish(3rd, 3.5, pathfinder, 4th, and 5th) and so I started looking at dark heresy when it launched its second edition. I was pretty excited when I looked over the rules and thought "huh, this doesn't suck...and magic doesn't seem crazy op". Picked up all the books within a month of looking into it and within a month of that FFG announced they were discontinuing their license with GW.

Of course I know this was as much GW's fault as it was FFG, X-wing was becoming too popular and actually taking a chunk out of the 40k community, but that doesn't change the situation i found myself in of having several hundred invested into a game that was no longer in existence within a year of it's release.

I'm not saying Armada is dead, the community exists in a lot of pockets throughout the country and thats' great...but FFG has pulled the support for it and when someone like me goes to try to build a community where people see that there hasn't even been news on new product since September last year...that's a rough sale.

Love the game, the setting is fine, and the price point is fantastic(if you think this game is expensive to get into look into how much a 2k army for 40k costs, this game is cheap) but it's got no support from the company that makes it and there's a reason. Be it incompetence, budget, or malice there's a reason we haven't seen much directed our way. /shrug, in the end it's FFG's loss when players walk away from their game. While I'm still fine keeping up with this game for the remainder of its life I'll never consider another FFG game, they're just too unreliable.

Edit: TL;DR: "WAAAAAAAaaaaaaa" on my part, just me whining about feeling like the game I enjoy is neglected by the company that makes it.

14 minutes ago, dominosfleet said:

(if you think this game is expensive to get into looking into how much  a   2k army for 40  k    costs, this game is chea   p  )   

Very true. I love when people talk about the high entry cost of Armada. I bought Dark Imperium without realizing I only had around a fifth of a 2k army, which really made me not want to continue.

4 minutes ago, Admiral Calkins said:

Very true. I love when people talk about the high entry cost of Armada. I bought Dark Imperium without realizing I only had around a fifth of a 2k army, which really made me not want to continue.

and those box sets are sold at a crazy discount. I tried to do some rough calculations on them and it's between 200 and 250 for the models in that kit per faction (so 4 to 5 hundred) not including the unique models to it, the mini rulebook and the other odds and ends. and like you said, that's a fifth the cost of a standard tournament sized army.

1 minute ago, dominosfleet said:

and those box sets are sold at a crazy discount. I tried to do some rough calculations on them and it's between 200 and 250 for the models in that kit per faction (so 4 to 5 hundred) not including the unique models to it, the mini rulebook and the other odds and ends. and like you said, that's a fifth the cost of a standard tournament sized army.

Exactly. Great deal for 40k, until I realized it was a trap. Good thing I did some math and coincidentally sucked at painting Space Marines (but am decent at squadrons).

1 minute ago, Admiral Calkins said:

Exactly. Great deal for 40k, until I realized it was a trap. Good thing I did some math and coincidentally sucked at painting Space Marines (but am decent at squadrons).

bright side about necrons. "prime black, add blue highlights, seal".