Jump to content

Nostromoid

Members
  • Content Count

    642
  • Joined

  • Last visited


Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    Nostromoid got a reaction from Rimsen in Visualization of Wave Release Timeline   
    Just in case anyone was interested.
  2. Like
    Nostromoid got a reaction from GhostofNobodyInParticular in Siege of the Arkanis Sector - Now in final post-test edits!   
    Okay, I hear ya, and I'm ready to go with a map that has location infoboxes like this one.
    Increased contrast on name. Larger and small-caps text on name. Planet images are bigger, so they take up more of the box space. Geonosis here is one of the only times anything "spills over" the borders. Increased contrast on sidebar text.
    Thumbs up?
  3. Like
    Nostromoid got a reaction from Bakura83 in Siege of the Arkanis Sector - Now in final post-test edits!   
    Okay, I hear ya, and I'm ready to go with a map that has location infoboxes like this one.
    Increased contrast on name. Larger and small-caps text on name. Planet images are bigger, so they take up more of the box space. Geonosis here is one of the only times anything "spills over" the borders. Increased contrast on sidebar text.
    Thumbs up?
  4. Like
    Nostromoid got a reaction from DurosSpacer in Interesting ideas for dangerous Imperial plots?   
    My players will soon be cracking into some juicy Imperial intel archives and I want to plant a future adventure hook in there. Something alarming, but with the potential to try to do something about it if the information can be acted on quickly enough. I'd like to steer clear of direct movie ripoffs, so not any Death Star plans or the like, but either a plan or a weapon that was to be kept secret that can spur the characters into action.
    Something like a new starship design, or an impending invasion somewhere in the galaxy, or a looming internal divide among the Moffs, etc...
    Got any awesome ideas?
  5. Like
    Nostromoid got a reaction from Archlyte in Interesting ideas for dangerous Imperial plots?   
    My players will soon be cracking into some juicy Imperial intel archives and I want to plant a future adventure hook in there. Something alarming, but with the potential to try to do something about it if the information can be acted on quickly enough. I'd like to steer clear of direct movie ripoffs, so not any Death Star plans or the like, but either a plan or a weapon that was to be kept secret that can spur the characters into action.
    Something like a new starship design, or an impending invasion somewhere in the galaxy, or a looming internal divide among the Moffs, etc...
    Got any awesome ideas?
  6. Like
    Nostromoid got a reaction from The Jabbawookie in Tactical Depth vs. Competitive Play   
    Disclosure, I stopped reading after about three paragraphs. I agreed with some of what you said, and I disagreed with other parts, but it was just too long to invest. That said...
    It's a mistake to think that your fun and someone else's fun are in competition
    I'm also someone who much prefers the creativity outlet of tabletop gaming to the min/max efficiency game. On that, OP and I agree. But try to train your thinking in a few ways. Number one, it's not about one fun being superior or ascendant over another. Neither is somehow purer or smarter or better or even preferred by FFG. Look to Magic the Gathering, which has famously profiled what makes its players come back to the game, and these profiles inform their game design.
    Think about things like Grand Admiral Thrawn. General consensus is that he's outvalued by hyper-specialist admirals. Some cutting-edge fleet that finds the most ruthlessly optimized card combos probably doesn't invest 32 points into a commander that just does normal things better and more flexibly than default. So, the card is more of a style card and a flavor card than it is a meta card. However, Armada has lots of different options for different types of players, and those can let people have different kinds of fun, even in the same game.
    Locus of control
    In any competitive activity, it's important to keep a handle on your gut instincts. When you win, it feels elating, and cockiness can ruin it all. When you lose, it's tempting to blame an opponent's cheap OP combo, or rules-lawyering. But that's bad sportsmanship, and cheating yourself of a learning opportunity. I guess what I'm saying is, in a discussion of whether Armada should cater more to listbuilding or to gameplay decisions, it's important to keep in mind that we all have access to both of these levers at the same time. We can listbuild more carefully if we want, and we can practice mechanics if we want. When I lose a game, it's not my opponent's fault for approaching the game differently. I can keep my focus on what I want to improve, if anything.
    Psychologists call this your "locus of control." Do you ascribe setbacks to external unfairness and cold dice, or do you look for solutions?
    What's wrong with casual play?
    Not to call out OP specifically, but even as s/he defends playstyles other than standard tournaments, there's an element of defensiveness around the term "casual." Let's get rid of the elitism around that idea and notice that most of us play pretty casually. Armada is actually much more pleasant about this than many other games, but remember that, although we congregate to discuss exciting and powerful playstyles, we don't have to diminish the fun of: playing with experimental ideas, playing against opponents who are likely to beat you, playing the fleets we enjoy even if they have Konstantine in them, and taking part in the social aspects of Armada. Most gamer communities on the internet aren't great at this. We try to bring down competitive players by calling them tryhards and we try to bring down casual players by acting like they're allergic to winning. The reality is that most of us are somewhere in between. Let's all just be comfortable with playing what gives us a fun experience.
    It took me a long time to realize that the debate about this topic is more about fun versus mastery than it is about casual versus competitive. "Casual" and "competitive" are inherently judgmental labels that place value on an expectation of winning. I came to the realization that I'm not actually terribly motivated by mastery of the game. I'm not playing in order to hone my tactics to perfection or to fix every mistake I make. Sure, I want to win and I do get better over time, but let's recognize that some players are focused on mastering the game, and some aren't. I'm not hoping to win Nationals, and the game is a lot more fun when I act like it.
    Here's what I do
    I know what you mean about Armada having a big collectible card game element to it. It's the FFG approach to make all games at least partially collectible. It's not my favorite thing in a wargame, but fortunately for FFG, it's also quite a good Star Wars game so they've got me hooked. Look at Legion for a game with a little bit less of this, and look outside FFG for games that break from this approach.
    In the meantime, you can also try out some *ahem* fan-made campaigns if you want an experience that emphasizes strategy over listbuilding.
  7. Like
    Nostromoid got a reaction from Cactus in Tactical Depth vs. Competitive Play   
    Disclosure, I stopped reading after about three paragraphs. I agreed with some of what you said, and I disagreed with other parts, but it was just too long to invest. That said...
    It's a mistake to think that your fun and someone else's fun are in competition
    I'm also someone who much prefers the creativity outlet of tabletop gaming to the min/max efficiency game. On that, OP and I agree. But try to train your thinking in a few ways. Number one, it's not about one fun being superior or ascendant over another. Neither is somehow purer or smarter or better or even preferred by FFG. Look to Magic the Gathering, which has famously profiled what makes its players come back to the game, and these profiles inform their game design.
    Think about things like Grand Admiral Thrawn. General consensus is that he's outvalued by hyper-specialist admirals. Some cutting-edge fleet that finds the most ruthlessly optimized card combos probably doesn't invest 32 points into a commander that just does normal things better and more flexibly than default. So, the card is more of a style card and a flavor card than it is a meta card. However, Armada has lots of different options for different types of players, and those can let people have different kinds of fun, even in the same game.
    Locus of control
    In any competitive activity, it's important to keep a handle on your gut instincts. When you win, it feels elating, and cockiness can ruin it all. When you lose, it's tempting to blame an opponent's cheap OP combo, or rules-lawyering. But that's bad sportsmanship, and cheating yourself of a learning opportunity. I guess what I'm saying is, in a discussion of whether Armada should cater more to listbuilding or to gameplay decisions, it's important to keep in mind that we all have access to both of these levers at the same time. We can listbuild more carefully if we want, and we can practice mechanics if we want. When I lose a game, it's not my opponent's fault for approaching the game differently. I can keep my focus on what I want to improve, if anything.
    Psychologists call this your "locus of control." Do you ascribe setbacks to external unfairness and cold dice, or do you look for solutions?
    What's wrong with casual play?
    Not to call out OP specifically, but even as s/he defends playstyles other than standard tournaments, there's an element of defensiveness around the term "casual." Let's get rid of the elitism around that idea and notice that most of us play pretty casually. Armada is actually much more pleasant about this than many other games, but remember that, although we congregate to discuss exciting and powerful playstyles, we don't have to diminish the fun of: playing with experimental ideas, playing against opponents who are likely to beat you, playing the fleets we enjoy even if they have Konstantine in them, and taking part in the social aspects of Armada. Most gamer communities on the internet aren't great at this. We try to bring down competitive players by calling them tryhards and we try to bring down casual players by acting like they're allergic to winning. The reality is that most of us are somewhere in between. Let's all just be comfortable with playing what gives us a fun experience.
    It took me a long time to realize that the debate about this topic is more about fun versus mastery than it is about casual versus competitive. "Casual" and "competitive" are inherently judgmental labels that place value on an expectation of winning. I came to the realization that I'm not actually terribly motivated by mastery of the game. I'm not playing in order to hone my tactics to perfection or to fix every mistake I make. Sure, I want to win and I do get better over time, but let's recognize that some players are focused on mastering the game, and some aren't. I'm not hoping to win Nationals, and the game is a lot more fun when I act like it.
    Here's what I do
    I know what you mean about Armada having a big collectible card game element to it. It's the FFG approach to make all games at least partially collectible. It's not my favorite thing in a wargame, but fortunately for FFG, it's also quite a good Star Wars game so they've got me hooked. Look at Legion for a game with a little bit less of this, and look outside FFG for games that break from this approach.
    In the meantime, you can also try out some *ahem* fan-made campaigns if you want an experience that emphasizes strategy over listbuilding.
  8. Thanks
    Nostromoid got a reaction from >kkj in Tactical Depth vs. Competitive Play   
    Disclosure, I stopped reading after about three paragraphs. I agreed with some of what you said, and I disagreed with other parts, but it was just too long to invest. That said...
    It's a mistake to think that your fun and someone else's fun are in competition
    I'm also someone who much prefers the creativity outlet of tabletop gaming to the min/max efficiency game. On that, OP and I agree. But try to train your thinking in a few ways. Number one, it's not about one fun being superior or ascendant over another. Neither is somehow purer or smarter or better or even preferred by FFG. Look to Magic the Gathering, which has famously profiled what makes its players come back to the game, and these profiles inform their game design.
    Think about things like Grand Admiral Thrawn. General consensus is that he's outvalued by hyper-specialist admirals. Some cutting-edge fleet that finds the most ruthlessly optimized card combos probably doesn't invest 32 points into a commander that just does normal things better and more flexibly than default. So, the card is more of a style card and a flavor card than it is a meta card. However, Armada has lots of different options for different types of players, and those can let people have different kinds of fun, even in the same game.
    Locus of control
    In any competitive activity, it's important to keep a handle on your gut instincts. When you win, it feels elating, and cockiness can ruin it all. When you lose, it's tempting to blame an opponent's cheap OP combo, or rules-lawyering. But that's bad sportsmanship, and cheating yourself of a learning opportunity. I guess what I'm saying is, in a discussion of whether Armada should cater more to listbuilding or to gameplay decisions, it's important to keep in mind that we all have access to both of these levers at the same time. We can listbuild more carefully if we want, and we can practice mechanics if we want. When I lose a game, it's not my opponent's fault for approaching the game differently. I can keep my focus on what I want to improve, if anything.
    Psychologists call this your "locus of control." Do you ascribe setbacks to external unfairness and cold dice, or do you look for solutions?
    What's wrong with casual play?
    Not to call out OP specifically, but even as s/he defends playstyles other than standard tournaments, there's an element of defensiveness around the term "casual." Let's get rid of the elitism around that idea and notice that most of us play pretty casually. Armada is actually much more pleasant about this than many other games, but remember that, although we congregate to discuss exciting and powerful playstyles, we don't have to diminish the fun of: playing with experimental ideas, playing against opponents who are likely to beat you, playing the fleets we enjoy even if they have Konstantine in them, and taking part in the social aspects of Armada. Most gamer communities on the internet aren't great at this. We try to bring down competitive players by calling them tryhards and we try to bring down casual players by acting like they're allergic to winning. The reality is that most of us are somewhere in between. Let's all just be comfortable with playing what gives us a fun experience.
    It took me a long time to realize that the debate about this topic is more about fun versus mastery than it is about casual versus competitive. "Casual" and "competitive" are inherently judgmental labels that place value on an expectation of winning. I came to the realization that I'm not actually terribly motivated by mastery of the game. I'm not playing in order to hone my tactics to perfection or to fix every mistake I make. Sure, I want to win and I do get better over time, but let's recognize that some players are focused on mastering the game, and some aren't. I'm not hoping to win Nationals, and the game is a lot more fun when I act like it.
    Here's what I do
    I know what you mean about Armada having a big collectible card game element to it. It's the FFG approach to make all games at least partially collectible. It's not my favorite thing in a wargame, but fortunately for FFG, it's also quite a good Star Wars game so they've got me hooked. Look at Legion for a game with a little bit less of this, and look outside FFG for games that break from this approach.
    In the meantime, you can also try out some *ahem* fan-made campaigns if you want an experience that emphasizes strategy over listbuilding.
  9. Like
    Nostromoid reacted to AllWingsStandyingBy in Tactical Depth vs. Competitive Play   
    This discussion is quickly devolving into a trend that Armada discussion always seems to head in: everyone is an armchair admiral expert, everyone pulls some random game from their past out as evidence, and the vast majority of people sound like apologists that just want to say "nu-uh, you're wrong, the game is awesomely balanced if you just do ______ (bid bigger, build a more jack-of-all-trades-fleet, fly better, stop making excuses and try and improve, etc)."  Anytime anyone starts a critical conversation here about the game the response just starts to sound like an echo chamber whispering back "Git Gud." 

    And the thing with Armada is that, if we're being fair to ourselves, it's not nearly played enough to really have a strong sense of meta or expertise or balance.  Even the "big" tournaments are often like 4 Rounds and a couple dozen people.  Because of how long games are, it's not a game very many people are practicing weekly at their FLGS, it's not a game with a thriving nightly Vassal scene.   Unlike a game like X-Wing, there simply aren't the statistically significantly large sample sets of completed events and game logs to draw from to support basically any of the positions one might take or express. Too few matches are played at events that are generally too small and too infrequently held to generate that sort of empirical evidence.  Yet so many of us, myself included, speak as though our anecdotal experiences somehow give us the view from on high.

    Heck, I feel like I could make up an Armada tournament report and post the results that a Garm all-Pelta fleet with no squadrons won, and a bunch of people would just post empty stuff like "Wow, yea this game is so balanced!"  or  "I've been saying the Petla was an awesome ship!"  or  "I've been using Garm for ages, he's so underrated, I took 3rd at the Podunk Open with him!"  etc etc etc
  10. Thanks
    Nostromoid got a reaction from Crewgar in Tactical Depth vs. Competitive Play   
    Disclosure, I stopped reading after about three paragraphs. I agreed with some of what you said, and I disagreed with other parts, but it was just too long to invest. That said...
    It's a mistake to think that your fun and someone else's fun are in competition
    I'm also someone who much prefers the creativity outlet of tabletop gaming to the min/max efficiency game. On that, OP and I agree. But try to train your thinking in a few ways. Number one, it's not about one fun being superior or ascendant over another. Neither is somehow purer or smarter or better or even preferred by FFG. Look to Magic the Gathering, which has famously profiled what makes its players come back to the game, and these profiles inform their game design.
    Think about things like Grand Admiral Thrawn. General consensus is that he's outvalued by hyper-specialist admirals. Some cutting-edge fleet that finds the most ruthlessly optimized card combos probably doesn't invest 32 points into a commander that just does normal things better and more flexibly than default. So, the card is more of a style card and a flavor card than it is a meta card. However, Armada has lots of different options for different types of players, and those can let people have different kinds of fun, even in the same game.
    Locus of control
    In any competitive activity, it's important to keep a handle on your gut instincts. When you win, it feels elating, and cockiness can ruin it all. When you lose, it's tempting to blame an opponent's cheap OP combo, or rules-lawyering. But that's bad sportsmanship, and cheating yourself of a learning opportunity. I guess what I'm saying is, in a discussion of whether Armada should cater more to listbuilding or to gameplay decisions, it's important to keep in mind that we all have access to both of these levers at the same time. We can listbuild more carefully if we want, and we can practice mechanics if we want. When I lose a game, it's not my opponent's fault for approaching the game differently. I can keep my focus on what I want to improve, if anything.
    Psychologists call this your "locus of control." Do you ascribe setbacks to external unfairness and cold dice, or do you look for solutions?
    What's wrong with casual play?
    Not to call out OP specifically, but even as s/he defends playstyles other than standard tournaments, there's an element of defensiveness around the term "casual." Let's get rid of the elitism around that idea and notice that most of us play pretty casually. Armada is actually much more pleasant about this than many other games, but remember that, although we congregate to discuss exciting and powerful playstyles, we don't have to diminish the fun of: playing with experimental ideas, playing against opponents who are likely to beat you, playing the fleets we enjoy even if they have Konstantine in them, and taking part in the social aspects of Armada. Most gamer communities on the internet aren't great at this. We try to bring down competitive players by calling them tryhards and we try to bring down casual players by acting like they're allergic to winning. The reality is that most of us are somewhere in between. Let's all just be comfortable with playing what gives us a fun experience.
    It took me a long time to realize that the debate about this topic is more about fun versus mastery than it is about casual versus competitive. "Casual" and "competitive" are inherently judgmental labels that place value on an expectation of winning. I came to the realization that I'm not actually terribly motivated by mastery of the game. I'm not playing in order to hone my tactics to perfection or to fix every mistake I make. Sure, I want to win and I do get better over time, but let's recognize that some players are focused on mastering the game, and some aren't. I'm not hoping to win Nationals, and the game is a lot more fun when I act like it.
    Here's what I do
    I know what you mean about Armada having a big collectible card game element to it. It's the FFG approach to make all games at least partially collectible. It's not my favorite thing in a wargame, but fortunately for FFG, it's also quite a good Star Wars game so they've got me hooked. Look at Legion for a game with a little bit less of this, and look outside FFG for games that break from this approach.
    In the meantime, you can also try out some *ahem* fan-made campaigns if you want an experience that emphasizes strategy over listbuilding.
  11. Like
    Nostromoid got a reaction from Alqui in My 3D Obstacles   
    Months after my first post about it, and almost a year after its original conception, I finally have something to show for myself. I'm really excited to finally get this on the table this coming Wednesday. Here's what I did with my long weekend...
     
    Bases and Posts
    Bases: 1/4" acrylic sheet with adhesive paper. Cardboard tokens were traced onto the paper, and the pieces were cut out on a scroll saw.
    Posts: 1/8" acrylic rods and 1/16" acrylic rods. Drilled a hole in the base (be careful to drill steadily, or else the hole will be too loose of a fit). 1/8" for the post and 1/16" for the branching pieces.
     
    Asteroids
    Lava rocks from Home Depot, with a few different shades of color added. You could do a stony gray, black, brown, lunar white, or martian red. I went with a dirty brown color, first spray priming them black for the recesses and then dry brushing brown over the high spots. You could also spray them your highlight color and roll them in dark wash, but I think having the color contrast helps them look cratered.
     
    Here's the finished product, minus one that wasn't quite done drying yet.
     
    And the final set.
     
     
    You're not going into an asteroid field?
    They'd be crazy to follow us!
     
    Dust Fields
    Polyester stuffing, spray painted black and then touched up with splotches of paint. I tried a few colors. Orange and peachy-tan were alright, purple (Citadel Genestealer Purple) was better, and gold (Citadel Gehenna's Gold) was the best. A 1/16" acrylic rod went through to give structure and an attachment point for the post.
     
     
    If you come around the corner of a dust field without looking both ways, you're gonna have a bad time.
     
    Stations
    The stations were actually the easiest part of the project. I had a "Federation Spacedock" from a set of 90s Micro Machines, and I bought another one to make two stations for the campaign and new objectives. One got a red paintjob to distinguish the two, and both got a little bit of touching up, though I may revisit the painting.
     
    One station, two stations, red station, blue station.
     
    A little staged action shot.
     
    Debris Fields
    I bought some miniatures from the old Starship Battles game by Wizards of the Coast. They were approximately in scale with Armada, and hopefully their destruction covers up any discrepancies. I used my drill and a nail heated over a candle to carve them apart, but a real hot knife or a minis saw would be better. I added some more wear by scorching them over the candle flame, and added some orange highlights to the exploded-open wounds.
     
    I used the same methods as the dust fields to do the billowing smoke and flames, but I'm actually going back and forth on whether I like them more without the smoke. In fact, there's a lot of details that are hard to see with how busy they are right now. I made one more set of debris as a "TIE fighter graveyard." The TIEs are rejects from the many extras I have, one was actually broken from the beginning. They were carved apart and burned over the candle. That hull piece was unsurprisingly cut off from one of the exploded transports, and the smashed-up satellite is for the final phase of my project (stay tuned).
     
     
    The Devastator jumps into Scarif orbit. "Lord Vader will handle the fleet."
     
    A little Rebel payback...
     
  12. Like
    Nostromoid got a reaction from thestag in Siege of the Arkanis Sector - Now in final post-test edits!   
    Siege of the Arkanis Sector Playtest - Round II: Things Pretty Much Hold Still
    Here is the state of the Arkanis Sector after the first set of battles played out. After the initial fleet clash, the Imperials dispersed the gathering Rebel fleet to individual pockets of the sector. The Rebels built some local connections and then struck back against Imperial power, launching attacks on the Regency Worlds of Arkanis Issor, and defending an attack on the gas giant Gedi IV. All three battles were won by the defender, so nobody lost any territory. However, new victory rewards were rolled up by the winners, and the playtest group messed around with the new Shipyards strategic effect, which generally unlocks some fleetbuilding options, including a much-increased-in-price method of unscarring a limited amount of stuff.

    My own battle was the defense of the placid tropical planet Issor as Vader, against General Rieekan's fleet. I chose to be first player, knowing that Rieekan brought the Profundity ready to drop a torpedo corvette in the most annoying places. Of the three objectives (Close-Range Intel Scan, Fleet Ambush, and Navigational Hazards), Rieekan, as second player, eliminated Fleet Ambush, clearly spotting an opening for my Kuat and Ex-Rax Raider to pile into his flagship before it could do its trick. Instead, I picked Close-Range Intel Scan, partly because I figured I'd be rolling more accuracies than his ships would, but even more so because I never get to play with dust fields and I wanted to. We ended up deploying diagonally across from each other and both wheeling our fleets (pretty good formation flying by both of us, and dodging obstacles with big ships isn't easy) toward the center. My Raider, coming in fast at a cross-angle from the rest of the fleet and trying to guess where the squadron fight would be, triggered the start of the battle when a swarm of X-Wings launched at it. It didn't have great survival odds, though it was helped by the Slicer Teams that had been scooped up as a victory reward by Sloane's fleet and were gifted to me, and by Rieekan's other flotilla being chased off-course and fleeing from the action. Still, the Profundity commanded just enough squadrons to dump pain on the Redirect-less Raider and just manage to blow it up before it could contribute anything. Unfortunate, but only the first casualty. Both commanders counted up points that could be snagged here and there while the heaviest ships continued to barrel toward each other at a blistering speed 2. With the Raider exploded, I sent IG-88 and my handful of TIEs to try to blow up Jan Ors (who was scarred in the last battle), who pulled off a sudden escape with the help of her Intel keyword. The big show finally arrived: Kuat versus MC-75. Vader got an early advantage by getting the better of the first volley as they closed range, and then the Profundity launched its corvette. Still outside of black dice range, Vader opted to vaporize the point-blank corvette, which was kept alive by Rieekan and served as a speed brake to deny even more black dice. Both large ships suffered a few damage cards from collisions, and my Kuat took some pings from the X-Wings that had broken through my fighter screen. The Interdictor transferred shields over to the larger ship and used DCaps to fling its own damage into the MC-75. In the second round of brutal slug-fest, Rieekan realized that the Profundity was going to inevitably explode, but a massive volley of damage from the Kuat ended Rieekan's ship before he could escape to hyperspace. The Profundity survived through Rieekanism until the end of the round, but its counter-attack couldn't sink Vader and the battle ended quite abruptly. Victory to the Empire!
    Elsewhere in the sector, Dodonna defeated Sloane at Gedi IV (Sloane retreated to Vor Deo) and Motti repelled Ackbar at Arkanis (Ackbar retreated along the hyperlane all the way to Piroket).
    This week, we didn't meet because of scheduling difficulties. Round three coming up!
  13. Like
    Nostromoid got a reaction from thestag in Siege of the Arkanis Sector - Now in final post-test edits!   
    A second follow-up: Here is the final or nearly-final version of the sector map. I definitely want any and all feedback on this, so it can be perfect in the next few days and I can get a version printed up for the playtest group. (Click to embiggen.)

  14. Like
    Nostromoid reacted to Grumbleduke in What Ship Do You Want Most Of All?   
    No. I'm saying that all we know at the moment is that the boundary between a Large ship and a Huge ship is somewhere between the ISD and the SSD.
    The MC85 is double the size of an ISD. So it would be larger than the ISD but smaller than the SSD. Making it work as either a Large or Huge ship.
    Generally ships don't hang over the edge of their base too much. At each size class, the smallest ships tend to be a lot smaller than the base, the biggest ships a bit larger. The ISD is quite a bit bigger than its base; the SSD is a lot bigger than its base. To me that suggests the ISD should be about as large as a Large ship should get (before they become too unwieldy) and the SSD about as big as a Huge ship should get. To me it seems reasonable to make the MC85 a Huge ship, then. It would be to the Huge base(s) as the MC80 is to the Large base - or maybe as the CR90 is to the Small base. Physically.
    In universe it makes sense as well; the MC85 is meant to be quite a big step up on the MC80. In game, it would be nice to have a Rebel Huge ship, and there aren't many alternatives.
    That said, I'd be fine with it being a Large ship - I just think it would look, feel and work better as a Huge one.
  15. Like
    Nostromoid got a reaction from Triangular in Siege of the Arkanis Sector - Now in final post-test edits!   
    A second follow-up: Here is the final or nearly-final version of the sector map. I definitely want any and all feedback on this, so it can be perfect in the next few days and I can get a version printed up for the playtest group. (Click to embiggen.)

  16. Like
    Nostromoid got a reaction from Bertie Wooster in Cheating in Star Wars Armada   
    A long time ago (2016) in a regionals far, far away (Boston), this issue came up as a dispute. The two players involved both moved forward, but as far as I know it never got definitively resolved.
  17. Like
    Nostromoid got a reaction from OgRib in Siege of the Arkanis Sector - Now in final post-test edits!   
    7/15/2018 Update
    Work on Siege of the Arkanis Sector continues.
    This is my long-time Armada project. It began as a set of houserules and wishlist for the Corellian Conflict, and eventually grew into its own thing, and I decided to wrap it up as a standalone campaign for Armada. It runs off of the same basic "engine" as the CC, but with several changes to curb snowball effects and encourage a more unpredictable campaign experience. It also shifts the setting to the Outer Rim, in the region of space containing Tatooine, Geonosis, Arkanis, and more.
    What this includes: A playable draft of the campaign. These rules should suffice for a group to split into teams and play through a campaign that emphasizes strategic targeting of enemy fleets, tactical movement around the sector, and a shifting fleet makeup that's more dynamic than the heavily preplanned fleets of the Corellian Conflict. Players familiar with the Corellian Conflict will find a lot of recognizable stuff in here, and getting up and running shouldn't be too terribly different.
    What this doesn't include: Any new game units! There are no new objectives, squadrons, ships, or upgrades in this document. You're expected to play the campaign using your normal Armada options. I have nothing against homebrew material and I'm anxious for the next wave as much as anybody else, but it simply wasn't part of the project's scope.
    What is still to come: Additional map polish. My graphic design skills aren't anything to write home about, but I'm putting it together. Expect that to be the next piece to come along.
    Current version: 0.71     Here's the link.
    Feedback and comments are encouraged. In particular, do these rules look like they would be fun to play?
  18. Like
    Nostromoid got a reaction from TrinityLyre in Siege of the Arkanis Sector - Now in final post-test edits!   
    The latest news is that my local gaming store has launched a full-scale playtest for SotAS, with three Rebel and three Imperial fleets kicking things off tonight. In Round 1, both teams battled in a Fleet Clash to decide the initial spread of forces across the sector. The 300-point fleets--we'll call them Three Admirals, Two Generals, and a Darth--were: 
    Rebels, heavy on MC-75s and MC-30s General Dodonna, in an Ordnance Cruiser carrying two B-Wing squadrons and a Y-Wing squadron in its rapid launch bays, along with an external racks MC30. Admiral Ackbar, in an MC-75 Armored Cruiser with a Landmonition, GR-75, and the beginnings of Rogue Squadron: Tycho and Luke. General Rieekan, in the Profundity, carrying a Hammerhead Torpedo Corvette and towing Gold Squadron, Jan Ors, and some escort fighters. Empire, with a phalanx of Imperial-class Star Destroyers Darth Vader (me), in a Kuat Refit, plus an Interdictor and a Raider with external racks for some big boomage. Admiral Sloane, in a Victory-I and Imperial-II, filled to the brim with TIE Interceptors. Admiral Motti, in an Imperial-II with a Quasar-II that launches so many TIE Bombers. The fleets, newly arrived in the Arkanis sector, clashed over the triple stars of Foroon. What began as a slow, cautious approach of several Mon Cal cruisers toward a modest Imperial blockade quickly escalated as Star Destroyers dropped out of hyperspace behind the Rebel forces and began heavily bombarding their shields. The Rebels turned and focused fire on the lead destroyer with their laser batteries and bomber complements while the initial Imperial forces closed the gap. The Rebels knocked some holes in that star destroyer, but the damage slowed after Sloane's expert pilots took Jan Ors out of the fight. Vader dropped into the battle on the other side, pursuing Dodonna's cruiser which quickly launched a heavy bomber attack against the Sith's rear engine array while his early warning systems lit up like a Wookiee Life Day tree.
    A stray dust field blocked a crucial volley or two from the most heavily damaged star destroyer, and provided generous cover for the Rebel ships rushing in, but Motti nevertheless held on for some time due to his engineering prowess and some helpful interdictor intervention that scrambled the close-range attacks of Rebel frigates that suddenly jumped into the middle of the battle. Evacuate, in Motti's moment of triumph? Obviously not, and he stuck it out to the end to drag as many Rebel scum down to **** with him as possible. The Imperial pincer attack eventually crippled the Profundity and forced Ackbar to retreat from the battle, Vader smooshed a flotilla against his front viewscreen like a highway bug, and at least one MC30 frigate was blown apart in the crossfire (crossfire!!!).
    Next week, the fleets take up positions around the Arkanis sector and begin surveying for resources to rebuild their forces.
  19. Like
    Nostromoid got a reaction from cynanbloodbane in Siege of the Arkanis Sector - Now in final post-test edits!   
    Campaign Map as of 7/19/2018.

  20. Like
    Nostromoid got a reaction from cynanbloodbane in Siege of the Arkanis Sector - Now in final post-test edits!   
    Basic Overview
    Siege of the Arkanis Sector works much like the Corellian Conflict. The rules document will assume that things work as described in the Corellian Conflict Campaign Guide unless otherwise noted, and will often reference that booklet. Here is a brief list of "things you should know."
    We're in the Outer Rim this time. Besides using a new campaign map (coming soon), a shift in theme is carried by some new strategic effects that are found in the various campaign locations. Instead of diplomats and spacers like you'd find in the civilized core worlds, the Arkanis Sector has smugglers and caches of critical supplies. Given the significant role that a few planets played in the Death Star development, you might even find some intel on Project Stardust.
    Everyone progresses at an even pace. Fighting over resource points and racing to max out your fleet before your enemies can keep up is gone. There is no reliable method for staying on top while keeping your enemy low in this campaign. Rather than capturing resource points, your fleet progresses on a steady track, and stays even with all the other players in the campaign. In this way, it's much more like an "escalation league" from many tabletop games. 
    Scarring is extra-lethal. You're far from your shipyards, and your starships don't last during a prolonged campaign out here like they do in the galactic core. When ships or squadrons are destroyed in battle, they will be scarred the next time that you use them. However, unlike in the Corellian Conflict, there is no way to repair this scarring, and if they are destroyed while scarred, they are forever removed from the campaign and will have to be replaced. Besides the thematic purpose, this rules change serves to give players a way to meaningfully affect the war by decisively removing especially threatening enemy weapons.
    Your fleet will be re-forged over time. The combination of the last two points means that your fleet composition cannot be easily predicted from the start of the campaign. You might begin with a certain setup, but as things are eliminated from the campaign, you will replace them with new ones. Because you are always keeping up with the other fleets, having ships and squadrons be permanently removed through battle destruction is not going to set you back in terms of fleet size, but it does mean that as you replace your forces during the process of expanding your fleet, ships will come and go, being slowly replaced by fresh reinforcements. Unique titles and squadrons may be key assets for a time, but if they are lost then commanders will need to develop new strategies.
    Victory brings unexpected rewards. The victory rewards system will give semi-randomized bonus content to the winners of each battle. After you are victorious, you will roll on tables that correspond to the location where the battle was won, and these tables will add (approximately 20 points worth of) extra upgrade cards, squadrons, or even small ships to your fleet. This is above and beyond the normal fleet that you build using the allotment of fleet points, so they may give a decisive advantage. Keep in mind that these victory rewards are often some of the "off-meta" content from Armada, so you'll need to be clever to use the pieces at your disposal to form a winning tactical force.
    So, that's it! With an eye toward avoiding snowballing, letting players come back by targeting the most dangerous enemy units for destruction, and a fun new setting, the Siege of the Arkanis Sector is a campaign that should be fun for those who have tried the Corellian Conflict and found it almost great but not quite there.
  21. Like
    Nostromoid reacted to Undeadguy in Galactic Civil War 2.0 - Undeadguy's Custom Campaign   
    I've been working on a new version of my campaign I posted earlier this year. This update is primarily about creating a new map and adding 3 resources: personnel, equipment, and raw materials. Each planet will generate at least 1 of each resource, which can then be used to purchase ships, upgrades, squadrons, and more.
    With a new map comes new fleet movement. I never really enjoyed the original CC point n shoot movement, and I couldn't figure it out in GCW 1.0. This time, I'm going for a risk style, so you can fortify frontier planets and coordinate fleet movements with allies. The map will be divided into 10 sectors and each will contain 10 planets. Controlling a sector means you can move between any of the planets, so it creates a "home turf" for you to defend. Hyperspace lanes will allow players to move fleets across the map, allowing for quick attacks or retreats.
    I still need to create the map, but I already have some ideas. 
     
    The Rules
    The campaign will be played in rounds. Each round is broken into 4 phases: Move, Combat, Resupply, and Purchase. 
    Move Phase
    Fleets may move to a planet that is connected to it or move to a planet connected via a hyperspace lane. If a team controls 70% of a sector, they may move fleets through the sector as if it were a hyperspace lane. Exchange fleet movements with the other team. If both teams are on the same planet proceed to the Combat Phase. Stand By Instead of moving a fleet, you may set it to "Stand By". This designates the fleet is ready to assist in attacking or defending planets within the sector. If a planet is being attacked or defended in your sector, you may move to engage. If no enemy attacks occur, the fleet remains in orbit of the planet it is on.  Only 1 fleet per player can be on Standby. Recon Each player has 1 recon unit. These team may be moved freely among the map and provide 100% intel on the planet they are on. Recon units cannot be killed and do not initiate combat. Enemy players do not know where your recon units are, unless they also have a recon unit on the same planet. Only 2 friendly fleets are allowed at the same planet. 3 friendly fleets can assault a space station, and only 2 friendly fleets can defend a space station. A maximum of 1000 points per side is allowed on a planet when moving fleets. This is raised to 1500 if you are assaulting an enemy space station, but 1000 if defending a space station. Combat Phase
    Initiative The side with less fleet points chooses who is first or second player. Deployment Follow deployment as normal, with the following exception: When deploying squadrons, you may not exceed your squadron value of all ships on the table. Example: A player has a CR90A and GR-75 deployed. They can deploy 3 squadrons because the sum of the current squad value is 3. 2 squadrons are required for a deployment, so another ship will need to be deployed before more squadrons can be placed. Disabled A ship is disabled once it receives damage equal to its hull. Continue to deal damage after the ship is disabled. Example: An ISD attacks a CR90 and deals 8 damage and an Acc. The Redirect cannot be used, so the CR90 reduced its front shields by 2, and suffers 4 hull damage. The CR90 is disabled and continues to suffer all the damage from the attack, receiving another 2 hull damage. It now has a total of 6 hull damage, and 2 more will destroy the CR90. The CR90 is now disabled. A disabled ship discards its command stack. It does not gain commands during the command phase. A disabled ship loses all shields, cannot attack, and must move forward 1 at the end of the ship phase. If it overlaps another ship, only the disabled ships receive a face down damage card. Players alternate moving disabled ships. A disabled ship cannot be activated. A disabled ship cannot hyperspace retreat, even if it declared a retreat earlier in the round. If a disabled ship receives damage equal to twice its hull, it is destroyed. (There is no scarring). You may attack your own disabled ships. A destroyed ship is removed from the fleet roster. All unique content is removed from the game. If you win and a disabled ship survives a battle, it must be repaired. Until it is repaired, it’s hull value is reduced by half rounded down. Give the ship a scarred token to represent this. To repair a disabled ship, follow this table: Insert table here
    Flotillas are destroyed instead of disabled. Boarding Ships may be captured with boarding parties. Boarding Troopers, Boarding Engineers, Jyn Erso, Darth Vader (the 3 cost one), and Cham Syndula. A ship must be disabled to be captured. When a ship boards a disabled ship, put a victory token on the ship card equal to the command of the boarding ship. Once a disabled receives victory tokens equal to or greater than its command value, the ship is captured. All non-crew upgrades and non-unique squadrons are retained on the ship. Captured squads can be added to fleets. Hyperspace Retreat During or after round 4, a ship may declare a retreat to hyperspace before it reveals a command dial. The top command dial is discarded. No commands may be resolved. The ship is removed from the game at the end of the round. Ships can be prevented from Retreating under the following conditions: A ship is targeted by Phylon-Q7 Tractor Beams and the ship is forced to reduce speed (a nav token cancels this effect). A ship is targeted by G-8 Experimental Projector. A ship starts is activation at 1-2 of a G7-X Grav Well Projector token. If the retreating ship is at 1-2 of the token after the ship moves, the ship retreats successfully. Squadrons at range 1 of a retreating ship may board and retreat. Up to 2 enemy squads at range 1 can attack the retreating squadron for free with dice modifiers. Squadrons that do not retreat in a ship are not destroyed if you lose the battle. They return to their fleet. Ships that successfully retreat are returned to a friendly planet in that sector. If no planet is available, move the fleet to the closest friendly sector and select a planet to move to. Team battle It is possible to have 2v1, 2v2, etc. during a battle. The players alternate activations as normal. All ships/squads in a faction are considered friendly to each other. Commander effects do not extend to teammates. End of game The game ends at the end of round 8. The player who scored more points is the winner, and the loser must retreat from the planet. The game may also end if there are no enemy forces at Range 5 of any ship or squadron AFTER round 6. The player who scored more points is the winner, and the loser must retreat from the planet. Resupply Phase
    At the start of this phase, you gain resources from each planet you own. Resources are split into 3 groups: Personnel Equipment Raw Material Disabled ships are repaired. This does not cost anything. Purchase Phase
    When purchasing ships, follow the table below (all points are rounded up 1 integer : 2.2 rounds to 3 )  
    Ship
    Squadron
    Crew (Officer, Support, Weapons Team)
    Hull (Offensive Retrofit, Defensive Retrofit)
    Munitions (Ordnance, Ion, Turbolaser)
    Support (Fleet Command, Fleet Support)
    Personnel
    4X Command
    1
    Divide points by 3
    -
    -
    1
    Equipment
    Divide points by 10
    Divide points by 10
    -
    Divide points by 4
    Divide points by 2
    2
    Raw Material
    Divide points by 5
    Divide points by 10
    -
    Divide points by 2
    Divide points by 4
    -
    Example: Purchasing an MC80 Assault Cruiser would cost 12 personnel, 12 equipment, and 23 raw material. Example: Purchasing an X-Wing would cost 1 personnel, 2 equipment, and 2 raw material. You may spend resources points to buy upgrades, ships, and squadrons. These appear in the fleet that you choose to put them in. Squadrons – instant Upgrades - instant 1 command – instant 2 command – 1 round 3 command – 2 rounds If you purchase a 2 or 3 command ship, you must wait 1 or 2 rounds, respectively, and during the Purchase Phase of the respective round for the ship to appear in a fleet of your choosing. Example: On round 3 of the campaign, I purchase an MC80. On round 5, during the Purchase Phase, the MC80 will be available for me to use in the next round. I can attach any upgrades I bought, or transfer upgrades from ships to the MC80. The MC80 will be assigned to a fleet. During the Move Phase in round 6, I can now move the fleet to a new planet.  You may move upgrades between ships and fleets so long as all participating parties are at the same location. You may combine fleets. The new fleet must remain on a planet that the smaller fleets are coming from. If there is a situation where you have an upgrade but cannot equip it, it is kept in the stock pile, which is at your space station.  You may purchase upgrades in anticipation of a ship being added to your fleet.  Ships may be swapped to another variant of the same class by paying the difference in point cost with raw materials and equipment.  The ship must be at a friendly space station. Any upgrades that does not have a slot are put in the stock pile.  Example: An ISD I may be swapped to an ISD II for 0 personnel, 1 equipment, and 2 raw material. Fleets
    Fleets fall into 3 categories. Flotilla 100-199 points. No commander. Task Force 200-349 points. Generic commander. Armada 350+ points. Unique commander. The minimum fleet size is 100 points. Once a fleet has 201 points, it gains a generic commander for free. Once a fleet has 350 points, it gains a unique commander for free. A fleet cannot lose its commander if it drops in points, unless the ship the commander is equipped to is destroyed. Commanders must be equipped to the largest ship in the fleet. A fleet may not contain more squadrons than 1.5X its combined squadron value. Independent Squads: The following squadrons do not count towards the squadron limit. HWK-290, YT-1300, YT-2400, Scurrg H-6 Bomber, Aggressor Assault Fighter, YV-666, Firespray-31, JumpMaster 5000, VT-49 Decimator, Lancer-Class Pursuit Craft, Mandalorian Fighter, and VCX-100 Freighter. Flotilla ships Limit 2 per fleet. There are no maximum points for fleets. Titles Exodus and 7th Fleet may be equipped to any fleet so long as it contains 2 ships that meet the requirement. Unique Characters
    There may not be duplicates of any unique character or titles in all players fleets. There is only 1 Luke Skywalker, Yavaris, Madine, Tempest, etc,. for the entirety of the game. If a unique character is destroyed, it is permanently removed from the game. Unique upgrades, except commanders and titles, may be purchased from a space station. Titles must be bought with XP tokens. Unique squads must be bought with XP tokens, and upgraded from a generic squadron. Commanders are assigned when a fleet exceeds 350 points. The following unique upgrades are limited 1 per fleet and can be purchased in multiple fleets even if they are destroyed. Strategic Officer, All Fighters Follow Me, Intensify Firepower, Shields to Maximum, Entrapment Formation, G-8 Experimental Projector, Grav Shift Reroute. Experience
    Ships earn 1 XP when they destroy an enemy ship. Squads earn 1 XP when they destroy an enemy squadron or an enemy ship. Place a veteran token on the ship or squadron after they earn XP. At the end of each battle, you earn 3 XP if you win, and 2 XP if you retreat/lose. XP is given to ships and squadrons in the fleet.  You may not give a ship or squadron more than 1 XP in this way. XP earned in this fashion may be given to ships or squads that already earned XP during the battle. Veteran tokens and resources can be exchanged for the following permanent upgrades: Ship Upgrades
    XP Tokens
    Effect
    Personnel
    Equipment
    Raw Material
    1
    Gain a command token when you activate
    1
    -
    -
    2
    Gain a title
    1
    -
    -
    3
    Increase your anti-squadron armament by 1 blue or 1 black
    -
    2
    1
    4
    Gain an upgrade slot of your choice except Experimental Retrofit
    -
    3
    3
    4
    Increase the armament of the front/back or left/right by 1 blue die
    -
    3
    3
    5
    Increase the armament of the front/back or left/right by 1 red die
    -
    3
    3
    5
    Double the effect of all command tokens
    3
    1
    -
    6
    Increase the armament of the front/back or left/right by 1 black die
    -
    4
    4
    6
    Gain a defense token you already have
    2
    2
    2
    7
    Gain damage reduction 1 – before you suffer damage, reduce the total by 1
    -
    5
    5
    Squad Upgrades
    XP Tokens
    Effect
    Personnel
    Equipment
    Raw Material
    1
    Reroll 1 die while attacking
    1
    1
    -
    2
    Upgrade to a unique squadron
    2
    1
    -
    3
    Increase your anti-squadron armament by 1 blue die
    -
    2
    2
    3
    Gain or remove a keyword
    2
    1
    1
    4
    Increase your anti-squadron armament by 1 black die
    -
    3
    3
    4
    gain 1 hull
    -
    3
    3
    5
    Increase your anti-ship armament by 1 blue die
    -
    3
    3
    5
    Gain 1 speed
    -
    3
    3
    6
    Gain 1 defense token
    2
    3
    3
    Exchanged tokens are returned to the pool. Planet Upgrades
    There are 2 upgrades that may be purchased for each planet. They contribute significant defense to the planet and are extremely expensive. Space Station – 25 Personnel, 40 Equipment, 50 Raw Material Ion Cannon – 15 Personnel, 25 Equipment, 40 Raw Material If a player is defending a planet with a space station or ion cannon, they are automatically second player regardless of fleet points. Both upgrades take 2 rounds to complete building. Example: A space station built in round 6 will be completed on round 8, and ready to defend the planet on round 9. Ion Cannon
    When defending a planet with an ion cannon, play with the green planetary ion cannon objective. Ion cannon tokens cannot be moved by enemy squadrons with Strategic. Space Station
    If you are defending a space station during the Combat Phase, you are second player and the attacking player is first. No objective is selected for a space station defense. Space stations have the following stats: 15 hull 8 shields 2 braces Ship armament: 3 red dice, 3 blue dice, 3 black dice Squadron armament: 1 blue, 1 black Instead of activating a ship, you may activate the space station and attack. An attack targets 1 ship in range, or all squads in range. Space stations have 1 hull zone. During set up, do not place the station. After obstacles are placed, the defending player places the station beyond distance 5 of both players edges in the set-up area.  Treat space stations as ships when damage is resolved. Critical effects may be triggered while attacking a space station. Assault Concussion Missiles does not deal additional damage since there are no adjacent hull zones. Space stations have a garrison. Add 200 points with of ships, squadrons, and upgrades to your forces. Mark these with an objective token to designate garrison forces. You may add any non-unique character to the garrison. Squads are limited to 1/3 of the garrison force. Before deployment, you may select any Garrison Forces to be "docked" at the station. Set these ships and squadrons aside. Any Garrison Forces not set aside are deployed as normal with the rest of the fleet. When the space station activates, it may deploy 1 set aside ship at range 1 of the station or 2 set aside squadrons at range 1 of the station. Any upgrades in the Garrison Force must be assigned to Garrison ships. You may not equip Garrison upgrades to your other fleets. Map
    The map will consist of 100 planets divided into 10 sectors. Each planet will be connected to neighboring planets, forming a grid like map. Sectors represent a group of planets and hyperspace lanes within the galaxy. To control a sector, your team must control 7 of the 10 planets. Controlling a sector allows your fleets to move freely within its boundaries. Hyperspace lanes are the primary routes used to travel long distances within the galaxy. They connect planets and sectors but are not required to move between them. To control a hyperspace lane, your team must control 70% of the planets connected to it. When moving on a hyperspace lane, you may travel to any planet connected to the route. Controlling a hyperspace lane prevents the opposing team from using it. Hidden Information
    Enemy sector – players will know how many fleets are in a sector, but not where or who owns them. Friendly sector – players will know where an enemy fleet is and who controls it. Neutral sector – players will be told how many fleets are in a sector and how close the enemy is to controlling it. Start of Game
    Each player will claim 1 sector which contains 7 planets. Each player creates 2 200 point fleets with a generic commander. Both fleets start at the space station in the contested sector. Start the first round with the Move Phase.
  22. Like
    Nostromoid got a reaction from OgRib in Siege of the Arkanis Sector - Now in final post-test edits!   
    Progress! From this to this.
      
  23. Haha
    Nostromoid got a reaction from OgRib in Siege of the Arkanis Sector - Now in final post-test edits!   
    my god... it was right there all along... how did I miss it?
    "It's a trap!"
    Am I a failure? Do I resign now?
  24. Like
    Nostromoid got a reaction from OgRib in Siege of the Arkanis Sector - Now in final post-test edits!   
    And here's what I've worked up for some icons to go along with the strategic effects. These will serve two purposes: on the campaign map, I will denote strategic effects for each location by icon, not by name (to save a little bit of space, since I have a lot of text to include with the rewards tables and objectives for each location); and also these will appear on token artwork for groups that want to print their own tokens to physically represent the effect abilities.
    Project Stardust, image taken from the Tarkin Initiative that spawned the Death Star superlaser. Critical stages of the project were completed in the Arkanis Sector, along with many military research ventures and prototypes. Both sides want to control the Stardust databanks on Geonosis and the Sentinel Moon.

     
    Smugglers, artwork based on a YT-1300 I found online and then flattened into an icon.

     
    Regency Influence. For want of an actual, canon emblem associated with the Recency Worlds (unless someone knows something I don't), I made this thing.

     
    Critical Supplies. The crate is Star Wars-y, but kinda meh still. But it took me forever to convert a picture of a crate into flat icon work like this, so I'm probably not going to touch it again.

     
    Fuel Depot. Star Wars doesn't often visualize its fuel sources, so I had to resort to some image manipulation of a fuel pod that I found on Google. I don't love the result, but it's hard to make any further tweaks to this that don't make it worse.

     
    Diversionary Force took some creative thinking as to how I could represent the concept in icon form, and I'm very happy with the symbol. It's kind of Planet Express, though I suppose there are worse things to subconsciously rip off.

     
    Desolate is a strategic effect of locations that don't ever have loyalty to either team, like the D'Anjon Nebula or the Gulf of Tatooine. There's no token associated with it, as it does nothing for you, but this symbol goes on the map for those locations.

  25. Like
    Nostromoid got a reaction from GhostofNobodyInParticular in Siege of the Arkanis Sector - Now in final post-test edits!   
    The latest news is that my local gaming store has launched a full-scale playtest for SotAS, with three Rebel and three Imperial fleets kicking things off tonight. In Round 1, both teams battled in a Fleet Clash to decide the initial spread of forces across the sector. The 300-point fleets--we'll call them Three Admirals, Two Generals, and a Darth--were: 
    Rebels, heavy on MC-75s and MC-30s General Dodonna, in an Ordnance Cruiser carrying two B-Wing squadrons and a Y-Wing squadron in its rapid launch bays, along with an external racks MC30. Admiral Ackbar, in an MC-75 Armored Cruiser with a Landmonition, GR-75, and the beginnings of Rogue Squadron: Tycho and Luke. General Rieekan, in the Profundity, carrying a Hammerhead Torpedo Corvette and towing Gold Squadron, Jan Ors, and some escort fighters. Empire, with a phalanx of Imperial-class Star Destroyers Darth Vader (me), in a Kuat Refit, plus an Interdictor and a Raider with external racks for some big boomage. Admiral Sloane, in a Victory-I and Imperial-II, filled to the brim with TIE Interceptors. Admiral Motti, in an Imperial-II with a Quasar-II that launches so many TIE Bombers. The fleets, newly arrived in the Arkanis sector, clashed over the triple stars of Foroon. What began as a slow, cautious approach of several Mon Cal cruisers toward a modest Imperial blockade quickly escalated as Star Destroyers dropped out of hyperspace behind the Rebel forces and began heavily bombarding their shields. The Rebels turned and focused fire on the lead destroyer with their laser batteries and bomber complements while the initial Imperial forces closed the gap. The Rebels knocked some holes in that star destroyer, but the damage slowed after Sloane's expert pilots took Jan Ors out of the fight. Vader dropped into the battle on the other side, pursuing Dodonna's cruiser which quickly launched a heavy bomber attack against the Sith's rear engine array while his early warning systems lit up like a Wookiee Life Day tree.
    A stray dust field blocked a crucial volley or two from the most heavily damaged star destroyer, and provided generous cover for the Rebel ships rushing in, but Motti nevertheless held on for some time due to his engineering prowess and some helpful interdictor intervention that scrambled the close-range attacks of Rebel frigates that suddenly jumped into the middle of the battle. Evacuate, in Motti's moment of triumph? Obviously not, and he stuck it out to the end to drag as many Rebel scum down to **** with him as possible. The Imperial pincer attack eventually crippled the Profundity and forced Ackbar to retreat from the battle, Vader smooshed a flotilla against his front viewscreen like a highway bug, and at least one MC30 frigate was blown apart in the crossfire (crossfire!!!).
    Next week, the fleets take up positions around the Arkanis sector and begin surveying for resources to rebuild their forces.
×
×
  • Create New...