Considering how long FFG was silent on the Armada front I wouldn't worry for at least 3 or 4 months. Hoping it's not that long, but wont surprise me if we are waiting awhile on anything new.

I know Polda brings this up all the time, but this is the reason I'm not worried:

FFG drops legend units like this, and it will draw a lot of people. Start saving up now!

Time to start painting tiny skulls on all my reanimate heads... sigh

1 hour ago, Aetheriac said:

Time to start painting tiny skulls on all my reanimate heads... sigh

Lol, I've never noticed those before. Where do they come from? Does waiqar have a mouldings factory to make tiny adhesive skulls or do they just have a spider monkey farm?

It's MAGIC.....

5 hours ago, Jukey said:

Lol, I've never noticed those before. Where do they come from? Does waiqar have a mouldings factory to make tiny adhesive skulls or do they just have a spider monkey farm?

I found the rune for "resurrection" in some old Disc Wars stuff, so I copied that onto my Reanimates' foreheads. You can see some of it in the link below. I still have to add the rune to about 6 more trays of Reanimates, but I have to highlight them first.

I was thinking about this the other day and I saw my copy of Battlelore over on the shelf.... Then I remembered how much I liked the release of the “neutral” units which could be incorporated into any faction. It would certainly help FFG sell to their entire installed base rather than just those from a single faction. You figure a couple of monsters (dragon, giant, etc.) and maybe a merencary captain and followers. Plus a nice mix of upgrade cards that every faction can use...

7 hours ago, sarumanthewhite said:

I was thinking about this the other day and I saw my copy of Battlelore over on the shelf.... Then I remembered how much I liked the release of the “neutral” units which could be incorporated into any faction. It would certainly help FFG sell to their entire installed base rather than just those from a single faction. You figure a couple of monsters (dragon, giant, etc.) and maybe a merencary captain and followers. Plus a nice mix of upgrade cards that every faction can use...

While I agree with others that neutral units would make me nervous about armies from different factions becoming same-y feeling and blander, I think that if there was a limit that forced most of your army to be off its own faction it could be okay.

As you say, it would benefit the entire player base with each neutral release, and could be an opportunity to get since neutral upgrades or reprints of errata out to everybody.

The other benefit neutrals would bring is it would give future new factions more to work with from the want they hit the ground running while they catch up.

1 hour ago, kaffis said:

While I agree with others that neutral units would make me nervous about armies from different factions becoming same-y feeling and blander, I think that if there was a limit that forced most of your army to be off its own faction it could be okay.

As you say, it would benefit the entire player base with each neutral release, and could be an opportunity to get since neutral upgrades or reprints of errata out to everybody.

The other benefit neutrals would bring is it would give future new factions more to work with from the want they hit the ground running while they catch up.

To be clear: I’m in the “no generic units” camp. I don’t think it would be good for the game.

If you really must do it, make neutral units unique/limited and give them smaller max formations, like 4 or 6 trays max. I don’t want to see an Uthuk player going against a Latari player just to see two MercStars as the centerpieces. That would be a quick way to kill my buzz for the game. I like the unique armies and the strategy that entails.

My thoughts exactly. I'd want to see unique units cap out, with upgrade, in the 40-50 point range, and be unique so you're giving up hero slots and limited to two in a standard army. That would ensure at least half your army is in-faction.

I'dalso hope the design for most neutrals would be as middle of the road options that are mostly attractive to a faction that doesn't do well at a thing the neutral unit offers, so the same neutral units wouldn't be popping up in everybody's armies -- some would be more appealing in some factions and not very appealing in others.

21 minutes ago, kaffis said:

I'dalso hope the design for most neutrals would be as middle of the road options that are mostly attractive to a faction that doesn't do well at a thing the neutral unit offers, so the same neutral units wouldn't be popping up in everybody's armies -- some would be more appealing in some factions and not very appealing in others.

The other way to prevent neutrals from showing up in all the armies is to simply not do pure mercenary units, but have units that will only join specific armies.

Aside from game balance, there's a certain thematic sense to it. Some dwarf units might be liberal-minded enough to work with Daqan forces, others might be willing to take money from Uthuk, but work with elves? I don't care what people say about dwarves and gold, there's not enough in the world for that.

I totally agree with the sentiments above. Neutral units have to be an adjunct to your force to maintain the asymmetry of the game (which I find compelling). Limit it to 25% of your total force and throw in some upgrade cards which can only be used by a particular faction to further refine and distinguish between the factions.

Lots of design opportunities here...

1 hour ago, sarumanthewhite said:

I totally agree with the sentiments above. Neutral units have to be an adjunct to your force to maintain the asymmetry of the game (which I find compelling). Limit it to 25% of your total force and throw in some upgrade cards which can only be used by a particular faction to further refine and distinguish between the factions.

Lots of design opportunities here...

At 200 points i dont want neutral units. 300 points though...

13 hours ago, Darth Matthew said:

At 200 points i dont want neutral units. 300 points though...

That’s an interesting thought. I don’t have any experience with this large of a force. Does the map get too crowded?

300 points is up to 5 smaller units (but probably more like 4) or around 2 medium/light end large units in addition. The 200 point map doesn't usually seem very full, and can often localize itself to just 1/3rd of the board. I think as you add points, you get more of a "line" feel for your units, with less room to maneuver sideways among the center units. I suspect it would feel more like some of the battles from military history and a bit less like a skirmish, which is where it is at now. I suspect the extra dials and units also add some time to the total game length.

2 minutes ago, Vergilius said:

less room to maneuver sideways among the center units. I suspect it would feel more like some of the battles from military history and a bit less like a skirmish, which            is where it is at now. I suspect the extra dials and units also add some time to the total game length.

I'd expect the same.. do you find that Latari suffers disproportionally in such games for to their reliance on skirmish tactics and lack of units that like to go toe to toe?

1 hour ago, kaffis said:

I'd expect the same.. do you find that Latari suffers disproportionally in such games for to their reliance on skirmish tactics and lack of units that like to go toe to toe?

I played a 250 point game with a friend just recently and this was exactly the case. Latari got the first hit in, but was steamrolled by the end of the game. "Overgrown" really suffers on bigger maps too.

7 hours ago, kaffis said:

I'd expect the same.. do you find that Latari suffers disproportionally in such games for to their reliance on skirmish tactics and lack of units that like to go toe to toe?

Scions still hold up pretty well. So do Darnati/Ventala with all of the defensive upgrades.

7 hours ago, Hepitude said:

I played a 250 point game with a friend just recently and this was exactly the case. Latari got the first hit in, but was steamrolled by the end of the game. "Overgrown" really suffers on bigger maps too.

At 300 points, you can layer your offense and defense. You can have multiple units that disrupt and screen the real hitters, and you can afford to throw units forward to their deaths if you need a turn or two.

Played 300 points with the deployment setup where you deploy in a column down the center of the table and fight end to end instead of side to side. We randomly pulled the two largest terrain pieces as well. So, even with the most narrow advance possible, with the 2 biggest possible things in the way, the game was still doable at 300 points. I had 21 trays of Latari deployed, my opponent had 19 trays of Ulthuk.

If you're going to line up shoulder to shoulder, you won't like 300 points. If you deploy, (or advance) in depth, it adds a crazy level of complexity to the game, as you start dictating worse action just so more of your units get involved.

Balance-wise, dispatch runners become really good, and battle are often fought around dealing with the support units doing the dispatching.

On 12/25/2018 at 9:12 PM, Darth Matthew said:

At 300 points, you can layer your offense and defense. You can have multiple units that disrupt and screen the real hitters, and you can afford to throw units forward to their deaths if you need a turn or two.

Played 300 points with the deployment setup where you deploy in a column down the center of the table and fight end to end instead of side to side. We randomly pulled the two largest terrain pieces as well. So, even with the most narrow advance possible, with the 2 biggest possible things in the way, the game was still doable at 300 points. I had 21 trays of Latari deployed, my opponent had 19 trays of Ulthuk.

If you're going to line up shoulder to shoulder, you won't like 300 points. If you deploy, (or advance) in depth, it adds a crazy level of complexity to the game, as you start dictating worse action just so more of your units get involved.

Balance-wise, dispatch runners become really good, and battle are often fought around dealing with the support units doing the dispatching.

Wow, that’s a fascinating analysis. That is exactly the type of game I like, but I’m also sensitive to how it would marginalize other forces or strategies. You might need to modify/create specific scenarios for this point level. I would imagine it could balance some of these different approaches. I would imagine you would also see deeper units with more upgrades (which I would think adds another dimension to the army building).

Sounds like a tournament variant to me...

One thing that crosses my mind is that the strict rules of the game only matter at the competitive level. Whatever you and your local community want to do to have fun, you're free to do. And I think given the size of the community and the size of the tournaments I've seen, we should definitely be encouraging people to expand how the game is played at the local level and offering those suggestions to the broader community as something to try.

11 hours ago, sarumanthewhite said:

Wow, that’s a fascinating analysis. That is exactly the type of game I like, but I’m also sensitive to how it would marginalize other forces or strategies. You might need to modify/create specific scenarios for this point level. I would imagine it could balance some of these different approaches. I would imagine you would also see deeper units with more upgrades (which I would think adds another dimension to the army building).

Sounds like a tournament variant to me...

All we play is 300 points now. The mission work just fine, and most of our games have been ending with a points spread of less than 30. We call anything with margin of 10% or less (30 points), a draw, and we see a lot of draws.