Hello forum friends,

Yesterday I got invited to stay up late playing Legion which was amazing. If Armada had a trooper combat as an alt way to disable ships or take over ships would that be entrusting to you?

45 minutes ago, Cubanboy said:

If Armada had a trooper combat as an alt way to disable ships or take over ships

Actually if done right this could be awesome. You could habe shuttle land on enemy ships that bring boarding troops with them. Those cold maybe target specific ship systems and internally damage the engines or lower the engineering value of a ship. To counter this there could be a new upgrade slot to station soldier on your ships.

6 minutes ago, LordCola said:

Actually if done right this could be awesome. You could habe shuttle land on enemy ships that bring boarding troops with them. Those cold maybe target specific ship systems and internally damage the engines or lower the engineering value of a ship. To counter this there could be a new upgrade slot to station soldier on your ships.

They could even do things like flip over facedown damage cards, or exhaust your defense tokens! =P

57 minutes ago, Cubanboy said:

Yesterday I got invited to stay up late playing Legion which was amazing. If Armada had a trooper combat as an alt way to disable ships or take over ships would that be entrusting to you?

No. Armada needs to be faster and less fiddly, not slower and more fiddly, in my opinion.

For years now, you can find groups that have tried to integrate Armada, X-Wing, and Imperial Assault into one gaming experience. So like, as you're fighting an Armada game, you resolve 'squadron battles' with a game of X-Wing, for instance. Or a galaxy-wide campaign where when a fleet wins at a planet, their "Imperial Assault" forces get to go down and fight their opponent's for the planet. I've never seen such an attempt actually get off the ground and sustain itself, because it becomes incredibly fiddly and slow and full of diminishing returns, and you need an incredible amount of table space and you are frequently setting up and tearing down different games. Playing it in tiny chunks makes it take forever, and most groups cannot even sustain a complete run through of the Corellian Conflict (from survey reports on these boards awhile back).

If players want a game experience that delivers something sort of like this, that seems to be what Rebellion is perfect for, as it abstracts the fleet and ground battles enough to make them actually practical to integrate and complete.

9 minutes ago, BiggsIRL said:

They could even do things like flip over facedown damage cards, or exhaust your defense tokens! =P

I just want a boarding troopers mechanic, maybe like a specialist, to be able to board the bridge and change command dials.

Or maybe even "assassinate" an enemy officer.

3 minutes ago, AllWingsStandyingBy said:

No. Armada needs to be faster and less fiddly, not slower and more fiddly, in my opinion.

For years now, you can find groups that have tried to integrate Armada, X-Wing, and Imperial Assault into one gaming experience. So like, as you're fighting an Armada game, you resolve 'squadron battles' with a game of X-Wing, for instance. Or a galaxy-wide campaign where when a fleet wins at a planet, their "Imperial Assault" forces get to go down and fight their opponent's for the planet. I've never seen such an attempt actually get off the ground and sustain itself, because it becomes incredibly fiddly and slow and full of diminishing returns, and you need an incredible amount of table space and you are frequently setting up and tearing down different games. Playing it in tiny chunks makes it take forever, and most groups cannot even sustain a complete run through of the Corellian Conflict (from survey reports on these boards awhile back).

If players want a game experience that delivers something sort of like this, that seems to be what Rebellion is perfect for, as it abstracts the fleet and ground battles enough to make them actually practical to integrate and complete.

I think trying to do it as part of one giant match is ineffective. I could see an ongoing "faction" style point system kind of like what FFG is implemting in their Organzied Play for Armada...but inclusive of all three minatures games.

So maybe I play Armada, and I win 2/3 matches on my casual tourney play. Each win gives my faction "3 points" (Each loss gives my faction 1 point, or tie it to MOV, whatevs). At the other end of the FLGS my buddy playing Legion wins with Rebels. My bro playing X-Wing out on the West Coast wins...so forth so forth, and Rebels wind up with the most points at the end of the season. During the next season, the factions are allowed to use specialized objectives in their lists depending on their performance.

This was done with a minis game called Golem Arcana, they had three factions (but just one game) and it was app assisted so all the data was uploaded to the devs and they also had the seasonal bonuses accompany a story-driven narrative that developed based on how the factions performed. Bonuses like starting with extra mana, or set-up positions (closer to the objective) - it was pretty cool. It could be done with FFG Star Wars minis, but I don't think it's a direction the devs want to take, or else we'd hear about it.

8 minutes ago, eliteone said:

During the next season, the factions are allowed to use specialized objectives in their lists depending on their performance.

Yea, the way you've laid this out is a much more manageable and practical way to handle incorporating all three "scales" of games without actually needing to integrate them.

I'd be wary to have a bonus prize that affected next season's games, though, as it seems like it would dissuade players. I could imagine players being like "oh, Rebels have an advantage now... I'm going to play Rebels this season!" or "Ugh, why would I play Imperials when I'm playing from behind?" or "Rebels are already the best faction because they won last season, and now they get a bonus?!" So it's interesting to see an actual game (Golem Arcana) actually implemented this sort of "bonus" into their organized play.

31 minutes ago, AllWingsStandyingBy said:

Yea, the way you've laid this out is a much more manageable and practical way to handle incorporating all three "scales" of games without actually needing to integrate them.

I'd be wary to have a bonus prize that affected next season's games, though, as it seems like it would dissuade players. I could imagine players being like "oh, Rebels have an advantage now... I'm going to play Rebels this season!" or "Ugh, why would I play Imperials when I'm playing from behind?" or "Rebels are already the best faction because they won last season, and now they get a bonus?!" So it's interesting to see an actual game (Golem Arcana) actually implemented this sort of "bonus" into their organized play.

It was really cool, the way they did. The factions all had backstories, I played the "Durani Empire" who was suffering from poor leadership and had some of the noble families trying to elicit change from within. So even when we lost the season, the motivation to affect the story in a positive outcome still had me playing the faction. It wouldn't be possible for FFG Star Wars mini's since the narrative and cannon is controlled elsewhere. I could see many players switching to the "winning" faction, but you could write the objectives in such a way that it's not over-powering, and remains thematic and have things for the first player.

The way I would do it for example:

"Priority Target" Seasonal Objective (May only be taken by current seasonal faction winner)

After deploying fleets, place one objective token on the second players flagship. Once per round during the ship phase, the 2nd players flagship may gain 1 shield and one command token of their choice. If this ship is destroyed, the first player receives a victory token (50 pts.) and 5 additional seasonal points."

I would tie this narratively in the following way "...blah blah blah... after the recent Rebel victories, Imperial Command has concluded Rebel leadership must be weakened. Further engagements are to prioritize neutralizing enemy command. In addition [flavor text for specialized blue objective, yellow objective etc.]

And on the opposite end....

"Intelligence operatives have confirmed an Imperial push to target our command assets. We are providing additional resources to our flagships....blah blah blah...."

1 hour ago, eliteone said:

I think trying to do it as part of one giant match is ineffective. I could see an ongoing "faction" style point system kind of like what FFG is implemting in their Organzied Play for Armada...but inclusive of all three minatures games.

So maybe I play Armada, and I win 2/3 matches on my casual tourney play. Each win gives my faction "3 points" (Each loss gives my faction 1 point, or tie it to MOV, whatevs). At the other end of the FLGS my buddy playing Legion wins with Rebels. My bro playing X-Wing out on the West Coast wins...so forth so forth, and Rebels wind up with the most points at the end of the season. During the next season, the factions are allowed to use specialized objectives in their lists depending on their performance.

This was done with a minis game called Golem Arcana, they had three factions (but just one game) and it was app assisted so all the data was uploaded to the devs and they also had the seasonal bonuses accompany a story-driven narrative that developed based on how the factions performed. Bonuses like starting with extra mana, or set-up positions (closer to the objective) - it was pretty cool. It could be done with FFG Star Wars minis, but I don't think it's a direction the devs want to take, or else we'd hear about it.

It could be somewhat integrated into Corellian Conflict in a 3v3 style. Each side has a leader for capital ships (Armada), squadrons (X-Wing), and ground forces (Legion). They then can have 2 lists w/ set objectives. Everyone meets one day to decide where the battle will take place on the map, forces used, etc, and then games are played when able. Everyone meets again the next week to tally wins, points, etc and discuss the next match up.

The planet choosen still gives the same rewards for the Armada part, planet terrain effects the Legion game, and something ties in w/ X-Wing game? Maybe amount and type of obstacles? Maybe tie in available ships to what is on the Armada list? The X-Wing ships are limited in upgrades to start the game like Armada. Unique characters can be on multiple lists but can only be used by one force each engagement round. Your Rebel team has to decide this round if Han is leading ground forces, flying the Falcon in X-Wing, or a rogue in the Armada matchup. Next round you have the option of assigning him something else.

If those three game systems were being played each week, maybe wins give advantage to another game next time its played.

So for example, Armada secures the system for assault. X-wing wins give squadron bonus to Armada and or air support to Legion. And maybe Legion gives advantage to the strategic resource of the system. Those points gained get carried over to the next round of games in the campaign.

34 minutes ago, Hetzen said:

If those three game systems were being played each week, maybe wins give advantage to another game next time its played.

So for example, Armada secures the system for assault. X-wing wins give squadron bonus to Armada and or air support to Legion. And maybe Legion gives advantage to the strategic resource of the system. Those points gained get carried over to the next round of games in the campaign.

I like the way that works. Assuming all wins Armada allows your team to construct a base/outpost to generate the resources, X-Wing gives all opposing ground units in Legion a suppression in rounds 1 & 3(?). Legion allows full resource generation from the planet if your Armada team won but only half(?) if the opposing Armada team won.

The character token system (diplomat, spynet) from CC could be expanded also to incorporate the other 2 games.

I think boarding works well as is for normal games. It's a powerful, non-repeatable short range attack.

If you were using Armada rules to play a pen and paper RPG, the standard boarding rules would be completely unworkable. But then, so would a lot of rules for a normal skirmish. Almost none of the objectives would work, neither would the station, ships would be jumping in and out of hyperspace throughout the battle, etc. It would have the feel of the old Lucasarts Xwing/TIE fighter games.

If you were playing an Armada campaign (CC, RR, or custom) it might be fun to try something closer to narrative campaign boarding. Maybe if an enemy ship in destroyed, and it was subjected to a boarding action by a ship of at least the same size or greater, you can spend some large number of campaign points to add it to your fleet. (Rebels only) Or capture/execute the officers so they can't be used again (Imperial only)

Here is an idea I've been toying with for integrating Armada / Legion.

Armada is the principal game, in which both sides attempt to control a sector of space. Battle over a planet is done with Armada. The difference in Tournament Points dictates what happens in the system: A 6-5 match (1 Point) results in a draw, no change in control. 7-4 or 8-3 (3 or 5 points) results in Legion combat for control of a planet. 9-2 or 10-1 (7 or 9 points) essentially puts the Fleet in complete control / blockading the system. If you have Han Solo and Luke Skywalker in a fleet, they can be used for combat on that Planet.

I have also considered using this concept for changing the loyalty for planets in the Corellian Conflict. This way the Margin of Victory would cause a planet to change from Imperial <-> Neutral <-> Rebel loyalty.