1 hour ago, Mad Cat said:

Dominator ... -4
Warlord ... -2
Redemption ... -3
Independence ... -3
Devastator ... -2
Cluster Bombs ... -2
Redundant shields ... -2
NK7s ... -3
Point Defence RR ... -2
Chiraneau ... -2
Expanded Launchers ... -3
Engineering team ... -1
Sensor team ... -2

This makes it look like you only fly Imperial. I'd like all the versions of the ships/titles to be worthwhile taking.

Some of the squadrons could be made better as well.

5 minutes ago, buckero0 said:

This makes it look like you only fly Imperial. I'd like all the versions of the ships/titles to be worthwhile taking.

Some of the squadrons could be made better as well.

Ship titles 3 imperial, 2 Rebel. Hardly faction biased.

And poor old Admiral Chiraneau at 10 points compared to the cost of an Intel squadron and all the other benefits Jan or Dengar bring.

Not only would I certainly play Armada 2.0 (or 1.5 would be fine), but I'm in the minority that thinks it's warranted. This game is well balanced from a relative perspective, but it could be much better, and an app based point system makes that infinitely easier. Balance isn't even my big deal, it's the squadrons. There needs to be a better squadron system, I find the squad game to be incredibly dull as it is now.

In short, I would embrace Armada 2.0 with open arms.

An updated rules reference would surely be appreciated.

Armada doesn't need it.

But if you had to buy conversion kits because of a huge overhaul like X Wing is going through, no, I would not convert at this time.

I have almost no way to get games in locally, so it'd make zero sense to spend that money. The only reason I am keeping with X Wing 2.0 is because I can still get a game of that in. And even so, I'm sticking with one faction and no longer buying one of everything.

If Armada got a Second Edition I'd want a massive overhaul, with all card stats/points being rebalanced at once. Also add laser cannon dice (green?) with cards that either upgrade damage against ships or allow green dice to fire at squadrons as point defense.

I do think that Armada is mostly ok right now with balancing, but if I'm paying for my entire fleets to be updated I'd want more than a simple update.

7 hours ago, Bakura83 said:

So X-wing 2.0 was what ended my investment in the hobby. I still own and love my x-wing collection but the thought of having to relearn a new system and re-buy stuff just to be able to play made it seem like a good time to move on. I like Armada more anyway and I don’t think Armada is as unbalanced as x-wing was getting near the end of 1.0, but the thought of them doing a similar Armada 2.0 worries me. It would undoubtedly end my continuing investment in that too.

Did anyone else say goodbye to X-wing after 2.0 was announced? Would you enjoy a new updated Armada or are you more in line with my thinking?

I only play casually with my son, and not often at that, but I have a sizable X-Wing collection that we haven't played in a LONG time because, I felt, the game desperately needed a rebalancing. (I kept collecting in good faith that when FFG did it, they would provide conversion kits, ala Descent 2.0)

So I was SUPER excited about the X-Wing 2.0 announcement, and started bracing my wallet.

But then Armada announced the SSD and ultimately THAT'S what put the nail in the X-Wing coffin, for me. I like the big fleet game a little better and while i was happy to keep up with a good collection of both, despite how rarely they hit the table, that's just too much all at once, one of them had to go.

On topic, I don't think it's necessary, but I would follow along if FFG was able to substantially improve the game with a 2.0, though I like the idea of a builder-app-based 1.5 even better.

1 hour ago, DUR said:

I'm all for an app to do Great Rebalancings of the Force, as well as for other benefits that digital distribution can bring.

I do think that FFG can learn from the app game market and maybe even do seasonal things: ship variants that are only available for a season, for example, to drive renewed interest without necessarily needing to release permanent, game-apocalypse level changes. If they're good, they can stick around!

That would be awesome! It's one of the things I'm really looking forward to in XWM2.0... Or at least in theory that I'm really looking forward to. The themed events with limited options, or with special options. Armada could take that a step further and come up with unique ship designs for specific events. It doesn't have to be overly balanced, so it wouldn't need massive play testing, but take the Gladiator as an example... FFG came up with the GSD-1 and GSD-2 variants. And we all know why they made up a second variant. But it'd be interesting to see a GSD-3 with all sorts of red/blue dice instead of red/black. Have an "alt art" as the participation prize for an OP kit, and then have it only be legal for that OP kit season. This might be a bad example because people still play with GSDs, but they could do a similar for VSDs or Arquitens or whatever (and obviously on the Rebel side... how about a non-titled Neb-B?) that would encourage more fun table time builds. It would also discourage local tourneys just being a practice ground for Regionals (which to be fair, is less of a concern in Armada than XWM... at least around here). Heck, they could even have something where it's a rebel captured GSD =P.

Too much time and money invested to quit if 2.0 comes around.

It's not needed, but no, I would drop the game if 2.0 came out.

I have a lot invested, but I'm not going to throw even more money at the game to play the same pieces I already paid for.

I would stop collecting, finish getting everything I wanted in 1.0, and just stop there. I'd consider it a complete game that I could teach people and play.

If they come out with 2.0 I'll play it. Do we need 2.0? IMO no. I can't find any major change necessary that would warrant a 2.0 (maybe a bit of randomness in determining initiative?)

Can I expect an Armada 2.0 way down the line? IMO yes. FFG has increasingly shown themselves to major players in the tabletop war gaming industry. Tabletop war games go through editions to keep the game alive and well (whether they'll keep their models/games fairly cheap compared to the competition we'll see and will probably decide if I ever stop playing).

6 hours ago, Dobbs Mottley said:

I can understand the reasons X-wing made the jump and even agree that from the point of view of the competitive scene, a reboot was needed.

Not just competitive. This strict casual is excited about the fixes, too.

As for Armada, I don't think it needs a second edition at this time, though I'd probably buy it if they made one.

6 hours ago, Mad Cat said:

I agree. The latest FAQ toned down all the too powerful upgrades but still left them playable.

There are still a few upgrades that rarely get used as they are over valued point wise.

So Here's my list of underperformers and a suggested point reduction to bring them back to being average (or slightly below)...

Dominator ... -4
Warlord ... -2
Redemption ... -3
Independence ... -3
Devastator ... -2
Cluster Bombs ... -2
Redundant shields ... -2
NK7s ... -3
Point Defence RR ... -2
Chiraneau ... -2
Expanded Launchers ... -3
Engineering team ... -1
Sensor team ... -2

independance should be -8. Honestly I think the opportunity cost makes your buff not even enough. Most of these upgrades should cost even less than what you suggest. Leading shot vs NK7? Yeh, leading shot all the way.

1 minute ago, Sybreed said:

independance should be -8. Honestly I think the opportunity cost makes your buff not even enough. Most of these upgrades should cost even less than what you suggest. Leading shot vs NK7? Yeh, leading shot all the way.

Honestly, many of those upgrades should be completely re-written as they could cost 0 points and I still wouldn't take them over the best in slot options.

1 minute ago, JauntyChapeau said:

Honestly, many of those upgrades should be completely re-written as they could cost 0 points and I still wouldn't take them over the best in slot options.

Agreed, which is why I'm in favor of Armada 2.0, unless the devs got the ball to FAQ the crap out of what's broken.

41 minutes ago, JJ48 said:

Not just competitive. This strict casual is excited about the fixes, too. 

As for Armada, I don't think it needs a second edition at this time, though I'd probably buy it if they made one.

Highlighting this. I played X-Wing strictly casual with friends and the game became just...tedious. If a lot of games just boil down to "Let me just throw my attack dice against your defense dice and see what happens", aka luck, it just becomes a real borefest.

I just started getting into Armada with my brother-in-law. We're starting to slowly buy 1x of each expansion. Even if FFG announced a 2.0 tomorrow I'd be all for it. The expansion count versus X-Wing is a lot smaller in Armada so the amount of conversion kits would be minimal in my case. Plus we've managed to save a lot of money already with secondary market prices and our local store regularly sells games at 20% off retail. So happy that they had an Imperial Light Carrier and some Squadron I for Rebels and Imperials in stock.

3 hours ago, ElSuave said:

I just started getting into Armada with my brother-in-law. We're starting to slowly buy 1x of each expansion. Even if FFG announced a 2.0 tomorrow I'd be all for it. The expansion count versus X-Wing is a lot smaller in Armada so the amount of conversion kits would be minimal in my case. Plus we've managed to save a lot of money already with secondary market prices and our local store regularly sells games at 20% off retail. So happy that they had an Imperial Light Carrier and some Squadron I for Rebels and Imperials in stock.

That’s true, Armada does have a much smaller model count. By the time x-wing 2.0 was announced I had multiples of many, many ships and just couldn’t stomach having to buy all these upgrade packs, with Armada I have plenty of ships I only have x1 of.

X-wing 2.0 got me BACK into that game. I don't think Armada needs one but if ones offered... Where do I pick up my conversion kit?

It’s not needed right now or in the close future. I’d prefer more new content instead, like new campaign, or unit packs. I’m still waiting U-Wing and Alpha appiarance in the game.

12 hours ago, JJ48 said:

Not just competitive. This strict casual is excited about the fixes, too.

12 hours ago, Heimdallson said:

Highlighting this. I played X-Wing strictly casual with friends and the game became just...tedious. If a lot of games just boil down to "Let me just throw my attack dice against your defense dice and see what happens", aka luck, it just becomes a real borefest.

I wasn't suggesting that guys like you aren't or shouldn't excited by the changes; indeed, I think we're working to different definitions here! I do feel the changes to 2.0 are designed primarily to correct imbalances with the standard format of the game, which undoubtedly makes a lot of sense...it just doesn't really apply to me.

I've been collecting/playing X-wing for several years now and have introduced several friends to it, but have never played a standard-format 100/6 game: my interest lies in purely HotAC, narrative and Epic play. I realise I'm probably unusual in this regard, but I do know of other players who also feel a little bit left out by 2.0.

Speaking of which...I would like to see FFG use the X-wing (and a future Armada) app to break new ground. For example, the app could be used to offer downloadable missions/campaigns, alternative playing formats...maybe one day even a co-op mode. I can definitely see the advantages of a dynamic points system, but I also feel that the technology could do a whole lot more and I hope they start to embrace more of those possibilities...particularly if they appeal to the non-standard format crowd.

I'd lke to see a v2.0, but only if these are part of it:

- Steamlined squadron play

- Longer attack ranges

- Longer movement tool

- One range ruler (for both squads and ships)

- One step all-in-one range/arc/LOS measurement for an attack.

- 6x3 play mats!!

Upgrade pack with altered/upgraded cards? maybe a long time later.

2.0 too early, way too early

12 minutes ago, Thraug said:

I'd lke to see a v2.0, but only if these are part of it:

- Steamlined squadron play

- Longer attack ranges

- Longer movement tool

- One range ruler (for both squads and ships)

- One step all-in-one range/arc/LOS measurement for an attack.

- 6x3 play mats!!

For the record, all but the 6x3 play mats would keep me from switching over to a v2 Armada.

Version 2 would need to be a Superior game (to me, so based on personal opinion) for me to even consider switching.

While there are a few upgrades that could use a rewrite, for the most part, Armada falls under the heading of "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!"

I'm not for an App that will be mandatory(but I don't have a smartphone anyway!). I think cards are part of the game and an Armada table is prettier with card that without.

but an App will remove the CCG aspect of the game, wich forces palyer to buy more ships that they need just to get a few rares one, so it's bad for FFG sales.

Maybe Xwings got it because it involves less cards and those were easy to get 2nd hand anyway. a FAQed card set should certainly be sold at some date, as some modifications done are most important.