With official multiplayer rules just released, I just want to share a multiplayer mode that we used to play with my friends and some of you might enjoy this mode as well. We never ventured in to Corellian Conflict but we had our own 600 or 800 point games.

Radio Silence Mode -

All the rules are same with official rules, the only difference is no team member can talk to each other except in the beginning of round 1 and round 4. Logic was each small fleet was commanded by an admiral and during the heat of the battle they will have hard time to communicate with each other. So only atthe beginning of the battle they will meet to determine their general strategy and during the battle they will have only one chance to discuss their strategy. Any illegal communication was a game ender.

We could not interfere with each others decision so we really had to trust our teammate and it really made the game a multiplayer as we had to make our own decisions rather than every move being a joint team decision. ( also it made the games a bit faster as there was less talk between team mates)

We played 2x2 so far but it made the multiplayer game a little more exciting as the most of the decisions on board were not made by the team as a whole but as individuals so the outcome was not predictable. ( honestly sometimes frustrating too as my team mate once managed to parked his Corvette in front of a Chimaera and all I can do was roll my eyes and sigh ).

If you ever give it a try, please let me know how it goes.

I love this sort of suggestion. In my experience with team games like X-Wing, Armada, and others, you really need this sort of rule to make it feel like an actual team game where independent players are contributing in their own ways to the board state, and I've suggested exactly such house rules with games of Team Epic X-Wing years ago.


Without this caveat in place, what happens is it really ends up being a 1 vs 1 game anyways, but instead of 1 player making every decision it's a committee of voices consulting on every decision. So the game might as well be a 1 Player experience, but it's incredibly less efficient.

I might be imagining things but I was pretty sure that the rules already had a section about multiplayer games that stated that it is forbidden for players of the same team to communicate with each other.

3 minutes ago, LordCola said:

I might be imagining things but I was pretty sure that the rules already had a section about multiplayer games that stated that it is forbidden for players of the same team to communicate with each other.

There was a rule sort of like that in the very original X-Wing team game rules, but it was quickly dropped. Basically, the rule said that players on the same team could not communicate privately, and that team-to-team conversation had be loud and public so the opponent could here. So you could say like "hey, I need that A-Wing to go to the left this turn to not block me" as long as the opponents could hear it, but you couldn't privately give your teammate that information. I assume it was to prevent this "groupthink" 1 Player vs "groupthink" 1 Player sort of dynamic from happening.

That said, I never saw anyone follow the rule and it was quickly dropped from official documents.

Haven't closely skimmed the current Armada document to see if it's in there.

I like the idea, and the effect, but it feels a little off.

I particularly don't like 2 elements. The insta-loss from breaking the rule, and the explanation.

Communication is key in any battle situations, so to just say that cooperating factions can't talk because they are too busy is odd. It would be like two carrier groups not being able to coordinate in battle...and that's odd. How about both factions have had there communications compromised, so the fleets have gone silent in order to preserve their secrecy. No talking between allies can happen away from the table at all.

Like I said, the instant loss condition is harsh. While it provides tension, it also means that a frustrated quip from someone could end the game. "Why didn't you move that ship there instead you bonehead?" insta-loss. In line with the compromised communication, why not have a damage penalty. The team that talks takes one damage. Their communication was compromised, and the discussing of their plan allowed the enemy to react to their plan by sending a squad to intercept them or by concentrating fire on them, etc.

Team A talks. Team B calls them on it. Team B then does 1 damage to one of Team A's units within range of one of Team B's units. Basically an unstoppable 1 damage attack from a single Team B unit against a single Team A unit. So if the unit has a shield in that arc, it loses a shield, no shield means face down card. I'd put an extra house rule that the target of the damage must be a unit talked about in Team A's plan if at all possible, otherwise, whatever Team B can hit. If no units are in range, then Team B picks a unit on Team A's side and it receives 1 face down damage card (some sort of internal failure that resulted in damage).

Now it's pretty strategic. You can choose to talk to relay something incredibly important that you fear your ally might have missed, but something, somewhere is going to get hurt because of it. "I need that flotilla to move there and act as an obstruction while my ISD makes repairs. We might lose the flotilla, but that's better than losing an ISD." The enemy team has units in range of both the undamaged flotilla, and the un-shielded hull of the ISD. They choose to do 1 face down damage against the ISD.

It's the start of the battle, you realize what the enemies overall strategy is and you decide to communicate that to you're ally. "We need to take out both of those light carriers as that will handicap their squad advantage." Your partner nods, the enemy does one face down damage to your MC80 that has your commander on board (as nothing was in range on either side).

This way, you can communicate if you need, but there is a price. And if someone accidently blurts something out, it's not the end of the game, but just another point of damage.

I like the idea. Though you might need bigger games or more players to make it work.

Go to play any big game of Battletech. Like the big 12-20 player games at gencon. There are usually 1-2 people on a side with a strategy that all the other players kind of keep in mind. Everybody just tried to play the heck out of their own few units. You feel like a piece of a huge fight as your allies sometimes pull a brilliant/imbecilic move that you would never have concieved if you were the all powerful commander driving all units.

To to swing this in Armada, don’t split the fleet into 2-3 clear groups broken up only by points. Try splitting it so one player controls all the medium/large, one the smalls/flotillas, and one all the squads. You’ll see some weirder things happen then as each player is more likely to focus on a specific task. This may be obvious, but the more players lose sight of the big picture, the more organic a match feels.

If a team breaks the radio silence rule then the opposing team gets to check two command stacks of their choosing.

5 minutes ago, OgRib said:

If a team breaks the radio silence rule then the opposing team gets to check two command stacks of their choosing.

Interesting, but not sure how useful it is. I usually have a fairly good idea of what commands are coming up and when. And I'm not sure how much I really gain from knowing they are doing a concentrated fire vs a repair.

On 2/6/2019 at 7:56 PM, kmanweiss said:

Like I said, the instant loss condition is harsh. While it provides tension, it also means that a frustrated quip from someone could     end the ga  m  e  .

I like the idea of penalty damage points, we will definetely try next time. Perhaps maximum 3 will be allowed so that the chatter will be kept under control.

The only thing I like about the sudden death is that while playing you really feel responsible for your actions and you have only the beginning of the 4th round to check with your teammate, as you said sometimes it is really tense.

On 2/6/2019 at 9:11 PM, Church14 said:

Try splitting it so one player     controls all the medium/large, one the smalls/flotillas, and one all the squads. 

This is a nice idea as well, it could work especially at very large games. Personally I would love to have one or two big capital ships and just deal with them while I am sure one of my friends would just like to control squadrons.

Playing games in "radio silence" is fun. Close Action: Age of Fighting Sail has the same mechanism, and it creates a lot of excitement and tension. A big mechanical difference between Fighting Sail and Armada is that Fighting Sail has simultaneous movement. Ship captains write down their moves, everyone plays them out, and then collisions are resolved. I should also add that Fighting Sail is best when each player has only one ship.

There is also the question of theme. Fighting Sail is a late 18th century-early 19th century sailing combat game. Ships couldn't communicate in battle except by signal flags (the game has a mechanism for that). I agree with others above that radio silence feels odd in Armada. The idea makes sense to me in a scenario where some environmental factor is preventing communication and coordination among ships. In addition to radio silence, the order of ships, while going back and forth between the teams, could be randomized. While this adds a large chance input to the game, perhaps each fleet has a bowl or bag where the name of the ship to go next is drawn out. This would create drama and tension during the game, but it is something I would only want to play one or two times.

On 2/6/2019 at 1:56 PM, LostFleet said:

With official multiplayer rules just released, I just want to share a multiplayer mode that we used to play with my friends and some of you might enjoy this mode as well. We never ventured in to Corellian Conflict but we had our own 600 or 800 point games.

Radio Silence Mode -

All the rules are same with official rules, the only difference is no team member can talk to each other except in the beginning of round 1 and round 4. Logic was each small fleet was commanded by an admiral and during the heat of the battle they will have hard time to communicate with each other. So only atthe beginning of the battle they will meet to determine their general strategy and during the battle they will have only one chance to discuss their strategy. Any illegal communication was a game ender.

We   could  not interfere with  each others decision  so we really had to trust  our  teammate and it  really  made the game a multiplayer  as we had to  make our own  decisions rather than every move  being a joint team decision  . ( also it made the  games a bit faster  as there  was less talk between  team mates) 

We played 2x2 so far but it made the multiplayer game a little more exciting as the  most of the decisions on board were not made by the team  as a whole but as individuals so the outcome was not predictable. ( honestly sometimes frustrating too as my team mate once managed to parked his Corvette in front of a Chimaera and all I can do was roll my eyes and sigh ).      

If you ever give it a try, please let me know  how it goes.  

I really like your approach, mostly because of the reasons @AllWingsStandyingBy mentioned: otherwise it is as much a multiplayer game as chess. Especially if you have a wide gap within skill level within a team or a dude like me who is quite bad at not telling his team mates what their next move should be, it all starts to be a pathetic mimikry of a multiplayer game.

I think, for these reasons I also posted two or three years ago a radio silence mode of mulitplayer rules here on the forums. Those where much too complicated in hindsight. However, I wonder how in your proposal activation order WITHIN a team is determined? Is it the decision of the Grand Admiral?

Nevertheless, there are drawbacks to mention when using any kind of Radio Silence Mode. First, part of the fun of playing a board game is talking with each other. And talking about the current match seems natural. But by talking - even with the opposing team - tactical implications are always present. What else to talk about? Heaven forbid that because of a Radio Silence Mode the guys at the gaming table start to have a controversy about TLJ!

I feel like talking plans out loud in front of an opponent is penalty enough in a team game....

10 hours ago, Darth Veggie said:

I  wonder      how in your proposal activation order WITHIN a team     is determined    ?   

Thank you for your comments, well in our games activation sequence was who ever went first for the ships. Squadrons were a bit ticky as sometimes they would overlap.

9 hours ago, TallGiraffe said:

I feel like talking plans out loud in front of an opponent is penalty enough in a team game

Necessity for this mode did not come from need to hide our secrets from the enemy but more to give each individual player more independent playing experience.

11 hours ago, Darth Veggie said:

However, I wonder how in your proposal activation order WITHIN a team is determined? Is it the decision of the Grand Admiral?

I actually kind of like the idea of the Grand Admiral choosing WHICH player activates during their teams turn. But they are only allowed to decide the player, not the ship.

This might work better if the Grand Admiral doesn't have a fleet of their own. This would help the GA be able to keep the big picture without having to focus on his own world.