Jump to content

Gunner070

Members
  • Content Count

    137
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Gunner070

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

368 profile views
  1. As of now, my only request is..... NO Bulwark Mark III, Please!!! http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Bulwark_Mark_III (I'm playing SW Rebellion on PC and reminded myself how out-of-place and ugly they are, lol)
  2. To be honest, I'd like to see more "neutral" ships. What I mean is a released expansion having one card for Rebels and one for Imperials (Katana fleet dreadnoughts would be a perfect example, if they were still canon). Clone War Republic ships could easily fit into this idea.
  3. Thats how I see it. This is the only reason I don't like the fact that the unique unnamed squadrons (ie. Rouge and Black Squadron) are "Unique". I can live with it but I'd be ok with a rule saying you can only have up to 4 of one of these squadrons in your fleet. But honestly it's not the biggest issue in the world and I'm really just nip piking at it.
  4. I'd be ok with adding Clone Wars ships under the context that they are outdated ships used by the Rebel (CIS ships) or obsolete Imperial ships (Venator SD).
  5. So since this is in the armada forums, what stats would we give the Avenger? I'd say: Speed - 5 Hull - 5 vs Squadron - 4 Blue (Maybe 3 Blue and a Black) vs Ship - 1 Blue Counter 2 (Maybe add Escort, too) Cost - 15, Less black die and 1 less Hull than the Defender (16 points) but with more focus on anti-squadron with Counter 2. For a named pilot ability (Stele is the only one that comes to mind but he's already got a Defender): "When preforming a Counter attack, you may remove one blue die from your attack pool. If you do, you may add one black die to the pool."
  6. @Nostromoid I see where you're coming form, LOL. I know 4 Spynet tokens are impossible (at least I'm pretty sure), I just wanted to cover all possibilities. As for the Supergame, I'd be lying if I said I hadn't thought about making one. It's just too much for one person to make and I'm not a big part of the Bay Area meta enough to get a group together.
  7. Had an idea during a game this week. Bear with me, this changes the fundamental rules for deploying ships. Instead of deploying ships according to the rule book, do some sort of hidden deployment. - 2nd (or defending) player first places their ship cards face down in their deployment zone. These cards essentially replace the ships you would deploy during this step. Since there are facedown, the 1st player won't know which ship in your fleet is deployed at a location, just that they know a ship is there. In cases were you have multiple ships of the same type, the ID token would be placed under the card hidden. - 1st (or attacking) player can spend Spynet tokens to attempt to reveal ships before they deploy. They place a token on a facedown ship card they hope to reveal. After player one is done using Spynet tokens (if they choose to use any), the 2nd play can spend their's to cancel any that the 1st player used. When player 2 declares that they are done spending Spynet tokens, any of their ships that still has a token on them is reveal (flip faceup) and deployed on the battlefield (details to follow). - 1st player deploys their ships (not cards) onto the battlefield. - If the 2nd player still has any Spynet token, they may spend them to swap the locations of 2 facedown ship cards with each other. Each swap cost 1 Spynet token. - 2nd Player then reveals and deploys their ships. The ship's base must cover as much of the card as possible when deploying them. In the case of ship bases being smaller than the cards, they can put the ship any where as long as the entire base is in the ares covered by the card. If the base is bigger than the card, they can go anywhere as long as the card is still completely covered. - After both players deploy ships, they deploy their squadrons, according to standard rules (ie: 1st player deploys two, then 2nd player deploys 2, etc.) Example deployment: Rebels (2nd player) has a MC80 and 2 CR90s (ID 1 and 2) with 2 Sypnet tokens. Imperials have a ISD and VSD with 2 Spynet tokens. - Rebels place facedown CR90 (ID: 1) card on the left, CR90 (ID: 2) in the middle, and MC80 on the right. - Imperials places 1 spynet on the left card and their 2nd spynet on the middle card. Rebels use one of their tokens to cancel the one on the middle card. - Since the spynet on the left card is still there, Rebels reveal and deploy CR90 (ID: 1) to that location. - Imperials deploy their ISD and VSD, knowing the RC90 (ID: 1) is on the left but don't know which of the other 2 ships is on the right or middle. - Rebels use their 2nd spynet to swap the facedown CR90 (ID: 2) to the right and MC80 to the left. Then Rebels reveal and deploy the CR90 (ID: 2) to the right and MC80 to the middle. - Imperials start deploy 2 squadrons, then Rebels deploy 2, etc. Just another idea (and this would mean changing some of the objective's special deployment rules), but what do you guys think?
  8. I think it has something to do with the available options for the next few waves. If you take a look at some of the prediction articles, you don't see a lot of legit options for the imperials other than the carrier (the one the crew from Rebels stolen in season 2, I forget the name) or the Venator Star Destroyer. Rebels side got a boost with Rouge One and Rebels, adding the Hammerhead and the Flagship (again, forgetting the name) during the space battle. Also add the fact that FFG seems to be moving away from "Legends" ships in favor of canon ones (and those that take place in the GCW, since we haven't seen TFA era ships in Armada yet). Basically, the pool from which FFG can draw from for capital ships for Armada is vastly smaller than the pool for fighters for X-Wing. It's looks like they want to spread out waves and hopefully allow the movies, novels, comics, etc. to give them more options for future waves. Personally, if this is the case, I'd be ok with an X-Wing "aces" type release. Give us repaints and more upgrade cards for the ships we already have.
  9. I want this manual now, lol. Has there been community discussion of consolidating community articles and analysis to make an "Unofficial Commander's Handbook?" I'd totally want to get my hands on it. lol.
  10. We haven't needed to address that yet, no one has Z-95s in their fleet, lol. I'd have to load the game to make sure, but I'm 90% sure they did have hyperdrives in at least "TIE Fighter".
  11. I've been playing it as: - A Defeated squadron is only scarred/destroyed if it was attacked in some form or another that resulted in it's destruction. (To stop those who would play the loophole: "If a squadron leaves the playing field, treat it as if it was defeated from an attack but no enemy ship or squadron can claim it for veterancy") - If all ships are destroyed, any remaining squadrons will become/prevent becoming scarred or destroyed based on if the fighter carries a hyperdrive (according to lore). We base lore on the X-Wing/TIE Fighter sim games from the 90's, meaning TIE Fighters, Bombers, and Interceptors would become scarred/destroyed (no hyperdrive) while just about everyone else would "escape". If a squadron is in the AOE of an Interdictor, they become scarred/destroyed. Edited since I realized I may have worded it wrong.
  12. Ran into this one during a game last night: Is Counter affected by obstruction?
  13. Ah, so it's ok. Thanks! Bonus question: Obstacles affect squadron LOS too, correct? Example: TIE bomber is siting on top of an asteroid and wants to attack a ship. It basically can't because it would lose a die (It's one black die) due to obstruction.
  14. Hi everyone, I started playing Armada again recently since CC came out. Can someone re-explain LOS rules? Specifically, does the defending hull zones LOS dot HAVE to be in the attacking arc, even if just a portion of the defending zone is within the attack arc? I know this is a basic question but I've been out of the loop since wave 2 or 3. Thanks!
  15. So I'm going to start building fleets for a full go at the CC base rules but keep any ideas we've discussed here in mind while I play. Maybe it'll spark more or better ideas.
×
×
  • Create New...