Hello. We have fixed this dial chart and some others. Thank you for your help in fixing things!

Thank you for pointing this out. We have added the missing cards to the collection manager.

Hello. Just dropping in to let you know this is fixed.

Hello. You are certainly welcome. We are glad you are enjoying it thus far.
Adding individual component tracking is on our list of proposed new additions, though we do have other features we are prioritizing first. Thank you for your feedback!

It also would have given them the option to introduce built in special rules for ships, Just like X-Wing 2.0 did. I'm still puzzled by their absence in both Armada and X-Wing 1.0.

I honestly am rather annoyed at the whole “Armada 1.5” concept. They were presented with an opportunity to accomplish a vast and sweeping 2.0 reboot which could have:
A) done points and upgrade slots online (like X-Wing; it’s a vastly superior model). 

B) fixed even more broken/useless cards, commanders, and ships
C) also given us standard sized cards, evade token and squadron rules changes, and all the fixes and balance corrections they already gave us.
Instead, I feel like we got a half-assed effort that might make Leia, Konstantine and Tarkin a bit more playable, but didn’t do half of what it should have done.
Maybe I’m wrong, and maybe it will be awesome once it’s all on the table. I hope that’s the case.

The scale difference kills this game in my eyes.  I like the tile-based nature of Imperial Assault, but I would undoubtedly have bought into Legion if the figures were cross compatible... No way I'm buying a Star Wars-themed Warhammer/40K game, though.

When I started reading the article, I was actually hoping it was about unique, player-created characters. 
You don't really need an expansion for that, but official support to create your own character board with your own ambitions and stats would be my biggest request.

For many months, we were only about 6 or 7 at most on a typical casual night. 
Over the last couple of months, we've averaged 12 or so. We had 17 a couple of weeks ago.  We rarely have below 8. 
What changed? It's been a combination of things. Our top players made the game inviting for new players. They've endorsed new formats like Epic redux and Aces High, where we had two tables totaling 14 players between them last month. Our pros coach new players through strategy and tactics, and we focus heavily on social media engagement as well. We have fun and take interest in each other's enjoyment of the game. We even celebrate silliness like a Porkins list night. 
Our recent tournament had our legacy players all donate some considerable swag (hyperspace templates, championship dice, etc)  as prizes. Next month we're even giving the last place player some big rewards. We moved our game night to another evening where we had room to grow instead of being sandwiched on a Magic the Gathering tournament night. 
So there's alot of things it takes to build up the local scene. The good news is not a single one of those options included anything that FFG did or influenced. 
I was an outsider myself as little as 2 years ago. I had only played for the prior two years against the same 3 people at home. But once I ventured into the wild I met some really cool players. They're out there. You just gotta hang in there! 
Good luck! 

I really like this!  Is the final product going to be white, though?  I think gray or black would be a much more appealing color.
 
Edit: Also, one of my biggest concerns would be depth.  I would definitely appreciate a tray that's deep enough to accommodate ~8 acrylic tokens stacked.

I had intended to post on the day of, but as of a week ago, X-Wing 2.0 is one year old.  There's a lot to celebrate:
A refreshing new look and feel for a game that all of us on the forums love in one way or another, whether it's rules lawyering, theorycrafting, arguing about canon, or generally celebrating a game that we have invested some time, money, and often heart into. The introduction of a wealth of new and exciting content for Prequel-era fans, but also for many of the old stalwarts who've been there since the beginning. An increased release rate for waves - As of last Friday, as well, Wave V of 2.0 was available in most places in North America. A healthier competitive scene than the game has had in a very long time A significant reduction in Combowinging, Metawinging, and generally NPE, overall Card packs! Revitalizing Epic play, and separating Huge ships from the format so that there's more diversity in list-building Fewer erratas - and no complete card rewrites that are jokingly called "erratas". We've also had some downs - The initial backlash (and continued echoes) about the poor quality of the official app, the Wave IV release fiasco, and the limited amount of new content for the old factions are the ones that come to mind - but overall, X-Wing 2.0 is a game that I love even more than X-Wing 1.0, and I wanted to toast its health and continued popularity.  Anyone else want to raise a glass of blue milk?

It's the same game, with a bunch of small changes. While there are a few more rules than x-wing 1.0 (such as the system phase), the changes have generally streamlined the game, making it much easier to play. The changes in 2.0 have also focused the game more on maneuvering than on bringing the right upgrades. Almost all players agree that x-wing 2.0 is significantly better than 1.0. The game feels very alive and active, and people are enjoying it a lot more than in the tail end of 1.0 with ghost fenn and jamming reapers and whatnot.
If you were playing 1.0 a fair bit, you will not find the learning curve very steep. Imperials are very strong right now, particularly aces like vader, soontir, duchess, and the inquisitors.
I'll do a quick rundown of the main changes:
 
^ This increases variance somewhat, but it also means that out-flying your opponent is the best way to gain an advantage (rather than building a list with more broken upgrades and abilities than your opponent).
^ Many ships have "linked actions" which allow them to perform a second action at the cost of a stress. What these actions are depends on the ship.
- Evade tokens no longer "add" a result, they can only change a result. Reinforce tokens can add an evade, but have to let at least one damage through when used. THe damage deck is more consistent, and double damage from crits is common. This means ships die more easily in 2nd edition.
- If you cannot perform an action (eg. a boost you declare is blocked) that action fails and you don't get a redo. Also, barrel rolls are much less flexible than they were. This speeds up gameplay immensely.
- Round tokens (focus, evade, reinforce, jam, disarm, tractor) leave the table at the end of the round.
- Abilities that have limited use are tracked using tokens (called charge tokens) to make it easier to manage game state.
- Force users have force tokens (mini-focuses that can only change one dice result) which regenerate when spent (1/round).
 
If you like what you find in the core set, then a single imperial conversion kit will give you all you need to field competitive imperial lists with your ships from 1.0. A conversion kit doesn't contain enough to convert vast numbers of ships, but it is enough for almost all the competitive lists.

Turrets no longer have 360 degree firing arcs. A ship has to decide where their turret is pointing, and it costs an action to move it.
Dice modification is much more constrained, which makes dice rolls matter more. Gone are the days of rolling the dice and simply declaring that, due to upgrade shenanigans, that you've got all hits/all evades.
Push the Limit and Autothrusters are no more. Ships taking multiple actions in a round only really occurs when they've got a ship ability which allows certain actions to be taken (for example, TIE Interceptors can perform a stressful barrel roll or boost after performing another action).
EDIT: More things!
Charge Tokens: some upgrades and pilots use charge tokens to track things, rather than discarding cards. This looks much nicer on the board, and has opened the door for new and interesting abilities. Most ordnance now has multiple shots built in, making investing in torpedoes/missiles viable without multiple upgrades.
Things which require a target lock to fire no longer have to spend that lock to fire. This means you can reroll that inevitable blanking out on your Proton Torpedo shot.
The Force is a Thing. Force Users have Force Charges, which can be spent to convert eyeball results (one charge = one eyeball converted) or to power other abilities. They even have their own special class of upgrades (Force Powers) but don't have access to 'normal' talents.

November 12 release date
 
 
 

...random note that I sort of wish the official app would support this, as it's trivial enough to do given the stated objectives of the thing, and could be AMAZING for the game community if it allowed for casual pairings with handicaps (IE., higher-ranked player flying their preferred 200pt squad, with lower-ranked player...based on some formula derived from the ELO ranking...given XX number of points more to work with, or maybe just starting with XX points scored as the match starts - the goal, as with the concept of handicaps in sporting events, being to give players of an otherwise-notable difference in skill/experience an opportunity to play against each other with an equal challenge).

Fully executing a maneuver should include not hitting obstacles, period.

I voted yes, because I fundamentally agree with the change to the mechanics, but I think the phrase "fully executing a maneuver" shouldn't have to require an addendum with additional text.  Just change the rules definition.

I voted yes, because I fundamentally agree with the change to the mechanics, but I think the phrase "fully executing a maneuver" shouldn't have to require an addendum with additional text.  Just change the rules definition.

I voted yes, because I fundamentally agree with the change to the mechanics, but I think the phrase "fully executing a maneuver" shouldn't have to require an addendum with additional text.  Just change the rules definition.

I voted yes, because I fundamentally agree with the change to the mechanics, but I think the phrase "fully executing a maneuver" shouldn't have to require an addendum with additional text.  Just change the rules definition.

2. Should "after fully executing a maneuver" abilities become errata'd to "after fully executing a maneuver and if you did not overlap an obstacle this round" Precedent: Tie Defender x7 errata in 1.0. 
Vote ❤️ for yes, 😕 confused for no,  😆 for mixed answer/alternative-opinion

3. Should FFG revisit and check new abilities with the "after executing a maneuver" (without "fully") to avoid exploit? 
Vote ❤️ for yes, 😕 confused for no ,  😆 for mixed answer/alternative-opinion

1. Should Gas Clouds have more negative impact for either flying through them or landing overlapping them? 
Vote ❤️ for yes, 😕 confused for no, Vote 😆 for mixed answer/alternative-opinion

Addendum1: [Consistency] Should all obstacles explicitly force losing the default action? 
Vote 🏆for yes and yes. Vote 😭 for no and no. Vote 😆 for mixed answer
Issues 2 and 3 can be resolved in errata here also. 
 

I AGREE! 
 
...seriously if gas clouds aren't going to have consequences, please make full execute not count if a ship moved through an obstacle...

Well we know they don’t.... yet. The conversion kit comes with a single huge ship damage deck. Which it’s super cool they standardized that and that it’s one deck not a fore and aft deck pair.
Still.... wouldn’t mind seeing some graphics turn up to show damage report of a huge ship in the same fashion as the newly announced decks.