combining armada and imperial assault?

[ninclouse2000 1,049]

I'd like to try to merge the two games together, maybe using some axis and allies type rules.  Has anyone thought about about a way to combine the two games into a massive star wars game?

[player1904655 0]

My friends and I have talked about this. The best idea we had was to simulate a ground scale and planetary scale conflict at the same time. The team that did more damage or scored more points in space would get more threat or items/credits in Assault.

We also talked about doing an xwing scaled dogfight every time one of our squadrons became engaged in Armada.

Lots of cool synergy between these games. We basically have 3 different scales of warfare simulations.

[Mikael Hasselstein 6,898]

I haven't played (much) Imperial Assault, or bought into it, but I have X-Wing friends who play it, and I like the idea of doing a grand integrated campaign (Armada + X-Wing + imperial Assault) sometime in the future.

 

The most immediate way to combine them, I think is with boarding actions. Maybe use the DX-9 Stormtrooper Transports by MelMiniatures (Shapeways 3D printing) to move troops onto rebel ships to capture them. There might be a scenario in which a rebel ship needs to be captured rather than destroyed. Imperial Assault could represent the boarding combat.

[Norsehound 2,740]

Personally I always thought the games-within-games approach was impractical. The timing could be really inconvenient, such as one game ending before the relevance applies in the other. What happens if the ship is destroyed right after setup in a boarding match for Imperial Assault?

 

The only way I see this working is as, as suggested, a strategic game where you can use different games to decide the outcome of different planets. Unfortunately X-Wing is kind of sandwiched in the middle and, IMO, replaced utterly by Armada on a space playing field. X-Wing would be useful for atmospheric battles and giving bonuses to IA battles (For air superiority, perhaps conferring a bombing run on outside targets?), but the scope in space is so much bigger with Armada.

 

And if FFG ever does a Battle of Hoth game, IA would be similarly replaced.

[Grimmeth 2]

You'd almost definitely need to finish one before starting the other.  The battle of Endor actually could work as some form of inspiration for a campaign based around this.  Starting with an Imperial Assault Game (Bring Down the Shields), then dependant on the turn this happens would affect the points usable by rebels in an Armada game (creating the perimeter - not sure on the specifics) followed by an X-Wing game to blow the Death Star Itself (some liberties would probably have to be taken with this - such as making the reactor area a 3x3 board!

The time taken to complete objectives in previous games would add bonuses or negatives to each side in subsequent games - and obviously the victor of the last game would be the overall winner.

I'll have a think and see if I can crib something together - keep an eye on my blog in the sig (Shameless plug alert).

[Mikael Hasselstein 6,898]

I agree that simultaneous games won't work right. There needs to be an overarching game or decision-tree structure in which the different games decide the outcomes and the conditions of following games. At the same time, you don't want the outcomes of following games to be fully, or nearly, determined by earlier games.

[Grimmeth 2]

Yeah, some kind of minor alterations to missions or points values would be fine but nothing too heavy.

[Sirdrasco 254]

Made a rough rule set to incorporate all three FFG games.

 

https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/topic/179542-thinking-of-a-utah-armada-campaign/

[CenterPoint 268]

sounds to me like your trying to make Empire at War into a board game