Ships shooting engaged squadrons.

[Deathseed 1,738]

All of the games I've seen or participated in assume that a ship can fire its anti-squadron guns at any enemy squadron in range and fire arc of its declared hull zone whether they are locked in engagement or not.

 

Yet, I've not found a specific reference to that in the rules yet. I.e. I've not seen any rule stating that fighter engagement affects anti-fighter ship attacks at all.

 

Anyone else find something I've missed? Book and page number?

Edited March 30, 2015 by Deathseed

[FrozenFlesh 57]

Nope. It only affects movement.

[Deathseed 1,738]

Nope. It only affects movement.

 

And targeting for the squadrons. They can't target ships once engaged.

 

Nonetheless, I've got feelers out to FFG for a definitive answer.

[kilrolo 12]

Moving my thread into this thread.

"So my local group got a game of Armada in the other day and something odd came to mind after we played it out. As the rules stand there's no restriction on ships firing on enemy squadrons engaged with a friendly squadron. The "concern" came about regarding friendly fire into the skirmish between squadrons but we couldn't find any rules to support that concern. Anyone have any input?"

[ScottieATF 2,867]

You didn't find any rules to support that concern, because they just are not there.

There is nothing in the attack rules that make mention of altering the attack if the target squadron is engaged.

[Deathseed 1,738]

You didn't find any rules to support that concern, because they just are not there.

There is nothing in the attack rules that make mention of altering the attack if the target squadron is engaged.

 

Indeed, but the very fact that I've seen multiple people immediately ask the question begs an FFG answer.

 

Though I do get the cut of your jib.

[ScottieATF 2,867]

Does it? I mean people assuming things about how the rules should work that is not at all present in the rules in anyway, does that really need FFG clarification?

I'm not sure they have the staff to really clarify everything that isn't in the rules afterall. That would be alot.

[Ghost Dancer 401]

I agree with Scottie's posts. Ships can fire at engaged squadrons - there is nothing in the rules that even hints that this is any different to attacking a squadron that is not engaged.

[shasmalcoar 8]

Yeah, don't see why you wouldn't be able to shoot at engaged squads.

 

It is not one gun firing a massive blast to get everyone, it is point defence weapons firing at individual fighters, they should be able to tell the difference between friend and foe.

 

Even the ship to ship weapons represent multiple guns firing at different parts of the enemy ship with differing effects. There is a lot of abstraction going on at this scale, only when you have excessive numbers of one weapon do you get a specific effect and this is reflected in the upgrades.

[keroko 492]

Interestingly, the rules as written say that a ship can attack "each squadron." It does not specify "opposing squadron."

 

Does that mean you're shooting your own fighters as well?

[shasmalcoar 8]

The learn to play rules (pg 8) specifically state that you attack only enemy squadrons. So there is no friendly fire in this game.

[Ghost Dancer 401]

Rules Reference also states you cannot attack friendly ships and squadrons (p2 last bullet point under Attack section)

[DarthSidious 847]

Rules Reference also states you cannot attack friendly ships and squadrons (p2 last bullet point under Attack section)

Well, the Rebels don't do that sort of thing, and the Emperor frowns on wasting resources.

[Deathseed 1,738]

Does it? I mean people assuming things about how the rules should work that is not at all present in the rules in anyway, does that really need FFG clarification?

I'm not sure they have the staff to really clarify everything that isn't in the rules afterall. That would be alot.

 

They have a rules question function on their website for a reason . And I've already submitted the question.

 

Just because you might think it doesn't need to be asked doesn't mean I don't think it does.

 

And since I've got other players I know asking about it, it does have some pertinence for us.

Edited March 31, 2015 by Deathseed

[ScottieATF 2,867]

It's going to be an awfully long FAQ if the expectations is that FFG must acknowledge all things not present in the rules.

[Deathseed 1,738]

It's going to be an awfully long FAQ if the expectations is that FFG must acknowledge all things not present in the rules.

 

Ah the sacrifices we must make for progress.

[daloonieshaman 17]

we must all remember that there are differences of opinion and that in most cases rules that might seem one way to player A does not seem so to player B. It is in the best interest of any game designer to make clarifications as questions are raised to eliminate questions in players minds especially if you are to have tournament play.

The best example of a clear rules set is "Icepelt" Blood Bowl rules. It is darn near rock solid as the creators took the time to answer all the questions raised and after a little time all those answers were accepted as final rulings Sure it took time. no game has ever been released as perfect.

[hexedcoyote 8]

I don't mind waiting for an official answer, and I'm sure FFG won't mind answering the question. However, this does seem more like a situation where they didn't feel a need to add more rules or they didn't want to address it rather than an oversight on their part.

 

Now, I can see a thematic reason for it, so maybe the question should turn into "what house rule can we come up with for this situation?" I can see something like "When performing an attack against a squadron engaged with any number of friendly squadrons, make an attack roll with one blue die against each engaged friendly squadron" (probably too harsh), or maybe "When performing attacks against engaged enemy squadrons, remove one die from the attack pool". I might consider playing with one of these and seeing how it goes.

 

Hello by the way, I'm new here.

[InvisibleCalm 157]

Well... this is very situational, no?  I mean a friendly engaged squadron can be nowhere near the firing solution of capital AA attacks given you only need to be within range 1 to lock each other down.  Are there any rules about firing through a friendly squadron?  I mean it seems like that's really more of the issue at hand.

[wjgo 98]

Personally, I hope FFG does change the rules.  If anti-ship batteries can pick out a tiny fighter as range 2, moving at a relative speed it is (faster than a ship), and the battery can hit the only opposing fighters in what would be a large group of fighters juking around; it should have a better die roll against a slow and unengaged squadron

[ScottieATF 2,867]

Too many people have an untenable approach to this, and other, games ruleset.

Edited April 3, 2015 by ScottieATF

[Ghost Dancer 401]

I agree (and not for the first time) with Scottie. I think this is more of a "I wish this was in the rules" interpretation to something that is (to many of us) quite clearly not a rule. Squadrons do not obstruct attacks (would make Anti-Squad guns useless as most ships only have 1 die), and their is no friendly fire. In fact the rules state that you can't shoot your own ships and squadrons - they have literally spelled it out. That said, if you want a house rule to incorporate friendly fire, knock yourselves out

 

FFG are known for having streamlined rules that emphasise fast and fun gameplay, rather than being bogged down in loads of rules that might add 'realism' but remove the fun aspect of the game.

[Larac 14]

Also it comes from the movies,

 

The turbo lasers stopped firing when the Ties attacked the X Wings attacking the Death Star.

 

The extra rules to support it, may have been seen as too much. 

 

It is something that feels correct, but is not in the rules.

 

I like how they have tried to remove many of the cheats that are in X Wing.

[daloonieshaman 17]

Larac

 

I keep trying to tell people who keep referring to the Armada rules and comparing them to X-wing (but in x-wing you do this <with a little whiny voice>)

 

ARMADA IS NOT X_WING GET THAT IN YOUR FREAKIN HEAD!!!! lol (they still don't get it)