What works better for the Armada game system, taking into consideration how games are won on points and played around objectives.

Is it better to respond to your opponent's movement and attack or is it better to force an engagement and attack the opponent?

Forcing an engagement on your terms is generally the better move. First player has a significant advantage here of course. If you’re waiting to respond, you’re essentially waiting for your opponent to blunder. It’ll work if he makes a mistake, but if it’s an experienced player, you’ll end up playing very defensively in order to preserve points. That said, an objective manipulation list can mitigate the downside of running conservatively.

So, realistically, it depends on your list and play style. How about that?

Yeah I'd say it depends on your list & style. If you can work out one of those, the other should follow.

For example I favour ambush tactics, so I guess I could be described as a 'responsive' player. My favourite Commanders are absolutely Moff Jerjerrod and Raddus (though I do think Raddus needs a wee bit of nerfing...)

In both cases I'll often go into the game without much of an idea of how to attack, instead just waiting to see what my opponent does in the first couple of rounds. Then either Raddus drops in a warship somewhere pretty unfair, or Jerjerrod starts sending ships on hit-and-run attacks once I think I can out-manouevre the enemy safely.

Respond to your opponent's moves and force the engagement on your terms!

I usually play responsively on turn 1 and 2, then play more aggressively on 3 and 4.

Depends greatly on if you have first or second for activation.

Both. Neither.

The correct answer is controlling the engagement.

The goal of all the win conditions and systems in Armada - really in any good minis game - is to give you tools so that you can control when, where and how the engagement progresses. This may include ensuring you have activations so your best ships move into position to intercept. It might involve having second player so your opponent has to make risky plays to interfere with your strategy. It might involve having maximum squadrons to pelt them from any angle or no squadrons at all to deal hammer blows into their key ships.

Once you control the engagement, you control the game and can force the game to move towards the state where you win. If you don't control the engagement, your fleet needs to be built for and acting towards regaining that control.

And that's what's better in Armada.

to partly quote Sun Zu, guiding your opponent's choices toward the trap you just set for him is assuring victory

the problem is, the opponent is rarely kind enough to accept being goated without reluctance?

To partly quote John Barnes:

You’ve got to hold and give
But do it at the right time
You can be slow or fast
But you must get to the line
They’ll always hit you and hurt you
Defend and attack
There’s only one way to beat them
Get round the back
Catch me if you can
‘Cause I’m the England man
And what you’re looking at
Is the master plan
We ain’t no hooligans
This ain’t a football song
Three lions on my chest
I know we can’t go wrong