Several ace abilities were meant to simulate the variants and loadouts methinks. Norra tells all squadrons under her "command" to switch to ion bombs while Dutch's squadron is equipped with the less available ion turrets. Ketsu Onyo knows how to use her tractor beams. Jonus fires S-Thread Tracers at enemy ships when he is near them. (I don't know what Saber squadron's snipe is supposed to represent)
One thing that might have been nice would be a turret keyword that allows turreted ships to split their attack pool into 2 different attacks on 2 separate squadrons
I really don't think so at worst Moralo makes lists take squadrons, and personally I don't think that's a bad thing. I think this also assumes that stuff that is anti Moralo can't also be good against something else.
This group is more than capable of killing Moralo in one go, and even if he has escorts its still feasible to get him in one go sure requires some hot rolls on saber, but possible.
• Colonel Jendon (20)
• Maarek Stele (21)
• Mauler Mithel (15)
• Saber Squadron (12)
= 68 Points
I would also say that this group is fine going after ships or other squadron complements. Anything used to kill Marlo can also kill other squadrons, keep it so its also flexible aginst ships, and I really don't see the issue.
I mean 6 alpha striking ties are capable of killing Moralo in a single go. A Biggs ball could absorb Moralos damage then eat him. E wings with Hera last then firsting Moralo will do the trick as well. It's not as if these anti squadron solutions are unique to just dealing with Maralo.
You also have to consider in order to leverage all your possible activations you have to keep your squadrons at medium range of your ships, ships that keep themselves at long range limit the effectiveness Moralo abuse. Also Marolo would have a hard time running down @Truthiness ET CR-90s as it will take 3 movies at speed two to catch up and we could say you got the 3 moves from squall, but I do find that unlikely as its a positioning and logistical nightmare. Then you get 4 attacks doing 1 damage on avrage that wont kill the cr-90 and then if your other squadrons can reach that point to let him go crazy you can kill the CR 90, but then it just seams like you are throwing your squadrons out of support range to do that.
I don't see the extreme abuse being a thing, too many variables, and too dependent on an easily removed game piece. However he will help supplement shuttles in Imperal fish farm style lists.
Here's the thing: there's plenty of counterplay. Heck, it's right in the word: Counter. A small wing of fighters with counter, something that's already extremely common, would do just fine. Sure, you'd certainly lose a bunch of them, but who cares? Tokra's list has invested over 130 points to optimize a single squadron. That is a giant level of investment. If I can throw less than half that amount at Moralo to kill him, that's a net plus.
I present you the Imperial and Rebel counters to Moralo:
GR-75 Medium Transports (18 + 9: 27)
+ Toryn Farr (7)
+ Bright Hope (2)
Shara Bey (17)
Tycho Celchu (16)
2 x A-wing Squadron (2 x 11)
Gozanti-class Cruisers (23 + 3: 26)
+ Reserve Hangar Deck (3)
Ciena Ree (17)
Valen Rudor (13)
2 x Tie Interceptor Squadron (2 x 11)
Those are nothing special. They're not even tailored to take on Moralo. Those are just perfectly normal extracts from lists I already have. We can do all the theory crafting we want on this. We can "well what about..." all day long. Until I see someone take a super skew like this just to abuse Moralo and win a Regional, I'm just not going to worry.
As for X-Wing 2.0, you realize they're all the same developers, right? The same guys at FFG generally work on X-Wing, Legion, and Armada. Just check the credits. What you're really saying by invoking X-Wing 2.0 is Armada's playtesters are crap.
Oh don't be hyperbolic. It's a speed three squad and you'll be playing targeting beacons every time with that list. Any Imperial wing worth anything murders Muralo in a single activation with a comfortable buffer for the alpha strike. The you're left with a bunch of shuttles, a Quasar, and a Vic. Color me unimpressed.
You're assuming a very high degree of knowledge and cultural similarity. It's debatable whether humans make up the majority of sentients in the galaxy. Then we have societal differences, or how you might feel if that triangle was the last thing you saw before you were enslaved/your family killed, or whether you speak basic, or whether you know anything about the New Republic to begin with. The galaxy is a big place. If the New Republic walks around in Stormtrooper armor, or commandeered AT-ATs (which, by the same logic, are definite military improvements to crappy blue jackets and your own two feet,) these are symbols that have had a lot more time to become understood than they have, and that transcend language, culture and species.
Perhaps more importantly, you're sending a clear message to people who do know the story: "We realize these are terror and occupation weapons specifically designed to spread fear, pain and suffering among innocents... but we prioritize a cost-effective war machine, for the wars we definitely don't plan on fighting."
This. Plus ISDs were predominantly designed to be good at things that the New Republic was largely uninterested in (terror, orbital bombardment, wholesale destruction, etc.). The whole design was intended to be intimidating and compel immediate and total subjugation. Meanwhile the overpowered tractor array is a very clear sign of non-lethality at least in theory and battlefield psychology.
For my part, I was quite surprised with the look of it; I expected something more angular or flashy. Then I realized that that's why I play imperials. This really is a fantastic design for the Rebellion, like an evolved Nebulon-B (which spent more time in Rebel than Imperial use). TBH I really want to fly a bunch of these and generic Nebs in a swarm, and suddenly the new RitR upgrade makes so much sense...
I would imagine it's not about confusion. Overthrowing the Empire and then using the exact same ships that destroyed inhabited cities and were a symbol of terror is pretty bad PR.
Plus, it bankrolls the ever-hungry and newly idle military industrial complex.
It's definitely getting the game an awful lot of exposure because of this in the broader Star Wars community, whether FFG designed it or not, which is essentially a net equivalent effect. For both ships, in fact:
Disagree. The Dreadnought and it's assault frigate variant both look like they belong in battle star galactica rather than Star Wars. They have the ship design which couldn't be more generic sci-fi if they tried and lack the star wars flair. Meanwhile both of these new ships carry a bunch of non standard ship shapes and plenty of complex detail that I expect of star wars.
Like, I don't mind the Dreadnought, nothing wrong with the generic sci-fi look. But to advocate them while telling me these two new beauties don't look Star Wars enough in the same paragraph highly ironic.
@xanderf vs MM finished 354-0 to me. He won the bid and chose second. I picked his Advanced Gunnery. He made me start working on the lead generic ISD while the other two were somewhat boxed out, when it was about 2/3rds of the way dead it ran off the board and I was able to start working on the objective ship that came trailing in behind it. Some sub par rolling on both sides was highlighted when the objective Cymoon was unable to secure the acc needed on 2 AG front long range shots (with Vader rerolls) into my 1 hull objective BCC flotilla. The Interdictor then joined into the fight with two double arcs into the objective Cymoon after dodging its front arc. The quasar dodged just out of range of the objective Cymoon and sent the bombers in for the killing blow turn 5. Vader lives to fight another day after we called it with nothing else at threat of death.
Good game and good luck in the rest of the tournament!
Second round pairings are posted. As per posted tournament rules, this round will end Friday July 26. You are welcome to go ahead and begin play.
IF YOU BELIEVE I ERRED IN YOUR MATCHUP, CONTACT ME NOW SO IT CAN BE REARRANGED BEFORE THE START OF THE ROUND!*
*Being matched against the World Champ is not grounds for being an error.
The order for pairings has nothing to do with standings; it is just the order names and pairs were in my notes. If people would like up to date standings, I will get around to it eventually. In the meantime, all results are in the Fleet List sheet, and players and observers are welcome to compute them themselves.
Alright, over the last little while I’ve been in some conversations about exactly what different nautical terms mean for ships, and what does Star Wars do or not do in relation to the accepted uses of those terms elsewhere. Rather than continue to repeat myself until the end of time, I figured I’d write this up real quick as a reference sheet.
Before we begin, I need to get some assumptions out of the way. First, I will try to only use acronyms after I have appropriately defined them. Second, I will be moving forward and backward in time, and across multiple different naval schools of thought as I move through this. I promise all of it is intended to be a succinct explanation, but some of this history is so old the original meanings don’t apply anymore, but you need to understand them to see how we got where we are today. Third, any comparative adjective (big, small, slow, fast) is a relative term. Something is fast relative to something else, smaller than something else in the same time and space.
Finally, Star Wars is a mess. It is flagrantly disorganized, and absolutely does not care about the designations I am about to lay out, only regarding the Rule of Cool as the law of the land (space?). To that end, I will be trying to focus on the context of Star Wars Armada specifically, but in a few instances, I will discuss broader implications and patterns in both Legends and MouseCanon.
There are five major types of ship we are going to discuss today: corvette, frigate, destroyer, cruiser, and battleship. For the latter three, I will be going into some details about exceptions or close relations that don’t deserve (IMO) their own specific discussion but are worth discussing in the context of something else.
Let’s start with corvette. These are the small expendable ships that are the outermost pickets of a fleet, the least dangerous, but also the least expensive and the easiest to produce en masse. In real life, corvettes are generally the smallest true ocean-going warships you have, and are typically not capable of defending themselves against a large and aggressive adversary. Historically that emphasis on low cost also tends to mean these are the slowest by a fair margin, but the typical role is that of escort, particularly for merchantmen where speed is not at a premium.
The three ships Armada calls corvettes are all roughly in that zone, but they all can also fit in other categories, which we will discuss when we get there. These are the Raider, the Hammerhead, and the CR90. These are all the cheap picket ships of their faction, though none are particularly slow or unmaneuverable. Of the three, I would personally argue the only true corvette is the Hammerhead. Its role in Armada is to be cheap, and nibble at larger targets until a real damage threat comes along. ExRacks does mitigate this to a degree, but the point stands.
The next size type is frigate. By self-classification, this is the ship type in most common use around the world today. The origin of the term has nothing to do with the mission and everything to do with the design. During the Age of Sail, a frigate was a ship that was “frigate-rigged”. Frigates were designed as intermediary vessels between the plethora of smaller ships, which could be warships, and true ships of the line. They retained only one main gun deck (though larger ones would mount light armament on the main deck) but typically outgunned most other ships that were not ships of the line. The critical component was a combination of rigging (sails and things) and slender (comparatively) hull form that allowed the frigate to be extremely fast. Frigates could outrun most anything when the winds were favorable, and still pummel into submission anything smaller than they were that they ran down.
Over time, this type has radically evolved. Modern frigates tend to focus on defense, both of self and area defense of other ships. These are your archetypal escort units. They’re bigger and more capable than corvettes, but not as aggressive as a destroyer (we’re getting there), nor as capable of leading a squadron as a cruiser. I would upclass the CR90 to this role, and place the Nebulon (arguably) here as well. Ironically, the other two Rebel ships (none of the Imperial vessels meet these qualifications) the Assault Frigate and the MC30 Scout/Torpedo Frigate are very much not frigates, even with the emphasis of the latter on speed.
Star Wars lore is almost as flippant about the term frigate as “cruiser” and “Star Destroyer”. Things of all sizes, types, and varieties are referred to as frigates in different media. In short, it’s a term to ignore. Compare ships using criteria related to what they are and what they do, not their role. Frigates tend to be still quite numerous compared to heavier vessels, but not as expendable as a corvette. More emphasis on ship self-defense and survivability tends to pop up here.
This is going to be one of the contentious ones, so please finish reading this before you go angrily comment. Before I get any further, the term “Star Destroyer” has no apparent connection to the idea of a destroyer, and will be ignored as such.
Destroyers are one of the younger ideas included in this history lesson. They owe their existence to the invention of another weapon: the self-propelled torpedo. Now, when a modern audience hears the word torpedo they probably think of this or this. That’s not the origin of the term. The term originally meant an explosive charge of any kind intended to be detonated against the hull of a ship. When Rear Admiral Farragut (allegedly) shouted “**** the torpedoes, full steam ahead!” he was not ignoring self-propelled torpedoes, He was ordering his ships to avoid what would today be called naval mines.
Two years later the British engineer Robert Whitehead invented for the Austrians the first self-propelled underwater missile, thereafter referred to as the automobile torpedo, or just torpedo. At the time, ironclad steam-powered ships were just beginning their takeover of the world’s navies, and the new weapon offered the opportunity for smaller, faster vessels to attack larger, heavily armored opponents with a weapon that could bypass those defenses. (If someone wants an explanation of how a torpedo really attacks its target, please post and I will make a separate addendum on the subject.) At the time battleships consisted of large, unmaneuverable ships bristling with weapons, but the speed of torpedo boats, frequently converted speedboats dropping their weapons from racks on the outside of the speedboat were notoriously difficult to hit. Enter the torpedo boat destroyer.
Over time, “torpedo boat destroyer” was shortened to “destroyer” but the role was further enabled by engine technologies and rapid-fire guns. The role of these early ships was to seek out and destroy the small pests that posed such a significant threat to the battle squadrons, and eventually they acquired their own torpedo armament to carry out similar attacks against the enemy fleet.
Modern destroyers bear the most in common with what in the World War I and II eras would have been called “fleet destroyers”. These are larger, high performance vessels, in some cases arguably usurping the role of the cruiser, designed to aggressively seek out and destroy the enemy. Many, particularly American classes such as the Arleigh Burke retain significant capability for area defense, especially air defense, but they are a fundamentally offensive ship whose defense often comes down to the weapons the ship left port with.
Armada has several destroyers: Raiders, Gladiators, and MC30s all seek out and destroy the enemy, often at close range. All retain an element of DD (destroyer) philosophy in their hit-and-run tactics, most obviously exemplified by Soviet designs such as the Project 956 Sovremenny class’ unreloadable anti-ship missile armament, but even the torpedo tubes on World War II destroyers were difficult (at best) to reload in the middle of combat, providing the captains with a powerful weapon but limited uses.
To pre-emptively address a concern that will be raised in our next discussion, MC30s and Gladiators are perfectly capable of serving as flagships for MSU fleets, which starts pushing the line into cruiser territory. From a certain point of view, they both probably are cruisers, and are operating in that role to a degree when they are flagships. However, I am choosing to retain the classification of destroyer here, if perhaps destroyer leader (a bigger, meaner destroyer meant to lead normal-sized ones in battle) due to the aggressive playstyle they are clearly designed for.
So, the best way to easily explain cruisers is a poem by Rudyard Kipling. Cruisers are the middleweight go-anywhere do-anything units in your force. They can punish smaller ships and groups of cruisers can harass or even destroy a capital ship (a battleship or battlecruiser). A cruiser is fully capable of operating on its own, and would be allowed to engage a peer opponent without waiting for backup if the situation required it. The other characteristic of cruisers is the ability to lead a group of ships their size or smaller. For this reason, cruisers are often equipped with separate facilities for a flag officer to lead his squadron and fight the overall battle, as well as quarters and support equipment to maintain his staff and those operations.
Every ship left in Armada that isn’t a Large base, so the Assault Frigate, the Pelta, the Arquitens, the Victory, and the Interdictor is a cruiser. (The Quasar is obviously a carrier and so undergunned I’m ignoring it here.) These can be further broken up into light cruisers, heavy cruisers, and armored cruisers. Armored cruisers were invented first, alongside predreadnought battleships (see Battleships), and were made obsolete by the invention of the dreadnought. They are best characterized by ultra-heavy (by cruiser standards) armor proof against the weapons of anything not wielding battleship-size weapons, and numerous rapid fire but small guns. The only armored cruiser in Armada is the Interdictor, a role it managed to bring back from the naval dead.
Light cruisers and heavy cruisers are distinguished by their weight of armor and the size of their weapons. Under the Washington Naval Treaty, a light cruiser was any ship not a destroyer or smaller that possessed a main battery of 6” guns and was under 10,000 tons gross displacement. These cruisers were intended to be fast, cheap(er), to lead destroyer squadrons quite frequently, and to defend battle fleets against the same. By contrast, a heavy cruiser would mount 8” guns, and often armor proof against the same, and lead squadrons against other cruisers. Heavy cruisers in particular were often fitted to operate as flagships, and would lead squadrons and detachments not lead by a capital ship. Armada’s light cruisers are the Arquitens and the Pelta, while the Assault Frigate and the Victory are firmly heavy cruisers.
Battleships (and Battlecruisers)
The big boys, battleships. Again, the idea comes to us from the Age of Sail, when it was a “line of battle ship”, or more commonly “ship of the line”. Ships of the line came in rates that compared their size and weight of armament, and fought large confrontations in formations often line astern (one ship following behind another and so on). Over time, these evolved into ironclads, then predreadnoughts, dreadnoughts, battlecruisers, superdreadnoughts, and fast battleships. Each of those classifications is directly related to a certain technological, design, or doctrinal development that changed how the type was designed, built, and used in combat. To summarize the difference, early predreadnoughts used a mixed battery of weapons as their primary armament. HMS Dreadnought ended that trend, as did USS South Carolina by introducing the dreadnought type of all-same-caliber main battery weapons and only some smaller weapons for close defense. Superdreadnoughts were the evolution of that, bigger, heavier, more heavily armed and armored. In 1922 the Washington Naval Treaty ended battleship production among the world’s major naval powers, leading to a design hiatus while technology surged ahead. When World War II, those improvements allowed the creation of so-called “fast battleships” which while still sporting heavy armor and weaponry also were more balanced designs incorporating greater speed and flexibility into the overall ship.
Battleships (BB) more generally are the heavy hitters of a fleet, capable of smashing anything smaller than they are (that they can hit) and withstanding and returning copious amounts of damage from their counterparts in other navies. They are the pride and joy of fleet admirals, and the expensive weights on navy pocketbooks that drive legislatures ballistic. Some (though fewer than you might imagine) were fitted with flagship facilities, and none ever left port without heavy escort of all sizes.
Related to the battleship and invented at the same time is the battlecruiser (BC). These come in three flavors: British, German, and Japanese. British battlecruisers sacrificed durability to move at cruiser speeds with battleship caliber guns. They were not intended to stand in a line of battle with other battleships but to operate as its fast wing destroying anything else the enemy fleet might have maneuvering or in reserve. This is typically the design philosophy referred to when someone says something is a battlecruiser.
German battlecruisers by contrast sacrificed weapons caliber (though still hilariously outgunning any cruiser) to keep battleship grade armor at cruiser speeds. These ships were designed to fight in the line of battle when necessary, and acquitted themselves well when they did so at the Battle of Jutland. Japanese battlecruisers would sacrifice no expense (and less armor reductions than British battleships) to bring exceptional performance approaching that of much later fast battleships at outrageous prices.
Obviously all of the Large base ships in Armada are either battleships or battlecruisers. For myself, I would class the ISD as a fast battleship, with the Cymoon pushing the line into the battlecruiser for its notoriety as a small ship hunter. Similarly, the Liberty is a battlecruiser, the Home One a dreadnought (emphasizing armor and firepower at the expense of speed), and the MC75 in limbo as either a battlecruiser or fast battleship (the distinction is pretty narrow and relates to design intent more than actual technical characteristics) depending on your point of view. (Many fast battleships sacrificed a little bit of armor for a lot of speed.)
Now, depending on what you think of Star Wars canon, all of the Large ships are up for grabs in terms of role. Typically for example, the heavy Mon Calamari ships are referred to as cruisers or capital ships, which in normal naval parlance is synonymous with battleship/battlecruiser, which doesn’t make much sense. Cruiser isn’t wrong, they’re powerful warships leading independent missions and squadrons, but they also make up the Rebel “wall of battle”, the fleet in being the Emperor was intent on crushing at the Battle of Endor.
Similarly, the Finalizer class is referred to in many sources as a battlecruiser, despite including many survivability improvements from the Imperial class. Finally, there is the debate about whether the ISD is a true battleship or a jumped-up heavy cruiser. For myself, I consider a battleship, if perhaps a small one when compared to many of the semi-canon designs such as those by the famous FractalSponge that dwarf it in size and power. It is, at smallest, a heavy cruiser by virtue of its role as the Imperial Navy ship of choice when a planet needs blockading or there is any indication of serious combat threat in a situation. However, its use as the heavy muscle in many situations and the famous durability and firepower leave me more comfortable designating it a battleship and leaving the details to Lucasfilm, who really couldn’t care less.
Hopefully this was informative and you enjoyed the read. If there’s anything else you’d like me to expound upon, please feel free to ask. See page 2 of this thread for a version of this writeup intended to mimic an in-canon intel brief.
Release date is Q3 of this year, which means don't expect it until end of September, as that is end of Q3. Same deal with Rebellion in the Rim, it is likely they are going to both be released together.
I agree, it sucks to have waited this long, but they also have announced more product is in the pipeline. Armada isn't dead, it's just not FFG's priority compared to Xwing or Legion, and I will say that I'm glad we do not have legion or Xwings issues due to that. They have huge balance issues, Armada does not.