Is Armada gonna make it?

[ficklegreendice 34,318]

I'm unsure why people expect or need games to be unicorns in that regard.

 

tbf, there are not enough unicorns in these wargames

[Simonsays3 145]

there will always be a meta. No game, nor anything ever created by human hands, is perfect (and **** chess, ****'s boring)

 

the health of a game's balance is determined by how expansive said meta is

ficklegreendice nailed it. This thread reads like a people talking past each other - your personal definition of "meta" may look like "overpowered BS that beats everyone all the time" but when discussing something as new as Armada, "the meta" is no more than the ships/squadrons/upgrades that get played regularly and the strategies that accompany it. That's it. 

Now ships that get played and your definition of "overpowered BS...." may overlap at some point but any game that has players and an element of strategy will have a meta. It's no more and no less than how a game is played by people and what they bring to play that way.

With that in mind, Armada is still building slowly in store, but I see stuff flying off the shelves all the time so it's clearly selling well. And that is going to be the guiding star on whether or not it "makes it" - sales

 

I hope it does, because this game is awesome and I look forward to playing it for years to come but even if it stopped after Wave 2, I'd have enough stuff to play for ages. 

Edited June 15, 2015 by Simonsays3

[VanorDM 11,599]

Honestly, meta is as simple as knowing what kind of list other people are likely to play and building one accordingly.

For example, if I know that at my LGS Player X likes swam lists, and Player Y likes lots of bombers, so I build a list to account for both of those types of lists...

I've just taken part of the local meta.

The meta != Netdecking. The Metagame is simply the game outside/beyond/above the game. If you make a list of X points, and pick objectives based on knowing that the other player is likely to use max points so he will have to pick your objectives, you're involved in metagaming.

[ScottieATF 2,864]

There is no way for there to not be a meta once a game settles in. The only way that happens is if all options are, at the very least arguably, equally viable. And even at face value we know that already isn't true.

There will, and already are, absolutely going to be lists, strategies, modules, individual ship builds, etc; that are simply more effective then others. People are going to figure those things out.

Is that a problem? No, not necessarily. If what is viable is broad enough, if the descripency between have and have not isn't too broad then it isn't an issue. It becomes an issue when viable options are narrowed down to one to two things and not taking those one to two things is so crippling as to be pointless.

I don't expect FFG to get to that point, or at the very least not fix it, but that doesn't mean I don't expect there to be a hierarchy to what is viable. FFG is better then many of thier competitors but they aren't that good. Expecting them to be that good isn't going to go well either.

Edited June 15, 2015 by ScottieATF

[NeonWolf 788]

Just to chime in with my 2x Bits.

 

I think Armada will definitely "make it".  Whether it draws people away from X-wing or not is really a moot point.  They are both spaceship games, they are both Star Wars games.  They are not the same game.  X-Wing is a dogfight game and will appeal to people who prefer that type of game.  There are a few others out there like Wings of War (Glory?) and the sadly-out-of-print Aeronautica Imperialis.  The action is faster and generally speaking the only objective is to "kill the other guy".

 

Armada is a capital ship game.  Slower movement, more planning required, and at least as far as I am aware, unlike any other game on the market at this time.  Sure there are things like Full Thrust, VBaM, and the also-out-of-print BattleFleet Gothic.  I've never played VBaM or BFG but Full Thrust and Armada are quite different even if you discount prepainted models vs bring whatever you want.

 

Armada is a game that I am thoroughly enjoying and a type of game that I've wanted to play for a long time now.  Strategic list building, tactical depth, simple (comparatively) ruleset, and objective gameplay.  I think it fills a niche that has been empty, if not creating a completely new niche for itself.

Edited June 15, 2015 by NeonWolf

[CobaltWraith 229]

So I think Armada has "made it" past tense at this point. Both X-wing and Armada sold out for Worlds in less than 2 hours, and personally I'd love to know which one sold out first and how quickly.

[Chucknuckle 2,811]

So I think Armada has "made it" past tense at this point. Both X-wing and Armada sold out for Worlds in less than 2 hours, and personally I'd love to know which one sold out first and how quickly.

 

Just to nitpick, but I don't think being popular in competitive circles directly relates to being successful overall.

 

For instance, I think Hail Caesar is a very successful game, that has NO competitive scene.

[mxlm 902]

Yeah, there definitely isn't yet a very active Armada scene in the eastern part of the Los Angeles area, for example. You get one weekly group at a particular store (so far it's been four people, usually) and the rest is pick up games and people playing with friends (and maybe tournaments, but the "tournament" I showed up for on Sunday had three players including myself, so...).

[Mystic Force 34]

I think that it will take longer for a game of this size to reach a larger audience. The pieces are there, it just needs time now. I have been to three tournaments for miniature games in 21 years of gaming. I see tournaments as a nice to have, not essential for a game. The thing that puts me of gaming in those settings is the people. So hopefully Armada doesnt attract "those" people, but i dont hold hope that we will be that lucky.

As a game it has everything i have been waiting a long time to play.

[CobaltWraith 229]

I hear you there, but I think a large part of that is having a few people who really put themselves out there for a game and a community focused on keeping things awesome. The SLC area has a freaking FANTASTIC group of players right now, some of whom we see often and some not so often, but all very friendly. I'd say we have about 5 players into the game enough to set up their own events with stores, 5 stores we like who have set up events with us, 3 of whom the owner is totally on-board, and 3 other stores that are making some token effort but who we don't all feel the need to support. Tournaments may not be everything but active players in stores sure do draw in new players when your active group is friendly and open about it.

[Mystic Force 34]

Maybe the next thing to do is take it out of the game store to other venues. If i plonk a star destroyer down on a table in my local library, I am pretty sure you would get a crowd watch what you are upto.

[Lyraeus 4,759]

Maybe the next thing to do is take it out of the game store to other venues. If i plonk a star destroyer down on a table in my local library, I am pretty sure you would get a crowd watch what you are upto.

If my job had a desk job I would do such a thing.

[Forgottenlore 9,801]

This has nothing to do with a meta, you don't need to have OP'ed ships or units to have a meta. I'm not sure the people who say there won't be a meta for Armada actually understand what the term really means.The only way there won't be a meta, is if they close down this and every other message board that discusses Armada, close down every facebook page for Armada, and any other web page devoted to it. Then never hold anything bigger then a LGS sized tournament.

  

there will always be a meta.

 

the health of a game's balance is determined by how expansive said meta is

  

"the meta" is no more than the ships/squadrons/upgrades that get played regularly and the strategies that accompany it. That's it. 

Thank you all for getting the point I made 3 days ago

A guaranteed win list is not an indication of a meta, it is an indication of a BAD meta. Every game has a meta, it is unavoidable unless the people playing it are all completely isolated from each other and the game is always played with the exact same groups every time. Armada, x-wing, Warhammer, infinity, settlers of catan, rock/paper/scissors; every game has a meta.

With a brand new game such as armada, the meta can be in a state of constant flux, but it's still there. That is largely the point of regular expansions to hobby games, to prevent players from "solving" the game and creating a stagnant meta. The influx of new rules and abilities means the meta regularly changes, but it will always be there in one form or another.

[ScottieATF 2,864]

You're preaching to the choir.

[chico2323 63]

Armada game duration takes too long and some people have found it somewhat boring.

Also requires an even larger 3x6 playing surface doesn't help either.

[Lyraeus 4,759]

Armada game duration takes too long and some people have found it somewhat boring.

Also requires an even larger 3x6 playing surface doesn't help either.

This game takes less time than Firestorm Armada, Battle Fleet Gothic, 40K, WHFB, Warma/Hordes, etc. You can't compare the times between X-Wing and Armada because they are different types of games.

X-Wing is supposed to be fast pace where the speed of Armada is in line with the feel of the game.

[chico2323 63]

Armada game duration takes too long and some people have found it somewhat boring.

Also requires an even larger 3x6 playing surface doesn't help either.

This game takes less time than Firestorm Armada, Battle Fleet Gothic, 40K, WHFB, Warma/Hordes, etc. You can't compare the times between X-Wing and Armada because they are different types of games.

X-Wing is supposed to be fast pace where the speed of Armada is in line with the feel of the game.

Understood that's fair and I know you're right.

However the problem lies when the more casual crowd arrives they really don't care about technicalities. To them, miniatures are miniatures. I've been finding there is a lot more resistance on the slower armada game than the xwing game (which was an instant hit)

[Lyraeus 4,759]

They need to understand the scope of what they are playing.

Now armada games don't take too long compared to 40k and some other games and it is longer per turn compared to X-Wing but that is because there are more considerations and this is still a new game.

New games take time to learn and process.

Now as for my games. I can get through a round in about 5 minutes or so. At 400 that may raise to 8 to 10 minutes which is still far less time than 40k, Gothic, and Firestorm Armada.

If they want a faster game then X-Wing is their game. It is designed for that, thus you don't have objectives. It's just kill kill kill.

If they want faster then small fighter crafts are for them, if they want to feel like an Admiral with immense firepower at their fingers tips, Armada all the way

[Chucknuckle 2,811]

Armada game duration takes too long and some people have found it somewhat boring.

Also requires an even larger 3x6 playing surface doesn't help either.

 

This again highlights the difference between boardgamers and wargamers. To a Wargamer, a 3x6 table is small.And an Armada game is quick. To a boardgamer 3x6 is huge, and an Armada game takes a long time.

 

But Armada is a wargame, aimed squarely at the wargaming crowd. It will attract some people that wouldn't normally play this type of game, but (at least in my opinion) it is intended to woo the wargaming crowd.

[charlesanakin 399]

Maybe the next thing to do is take it out of the game store to other venues. If i plonk a star destroyer down on a table in my local library, I am pretty sure you would get a crowd watch what you are upto.

We've done this in a hotel lobby with X Wing. People are curious.

[Lyraeus 4,759]

Armada game duration takes too long and some people have found it somewhat boring.

Also requires an even larger 3x6 playing surface doesn't help either.

 

This again highlights the difference between boardgamers and wargamers. To a Wargamer, a 3x6 table is small.And an Armada game is quick. To a boardgamer 3x6 is huge, and an Armada game takes a long time.

 

But Armada is a wargame, aimed squarely at the wargaming crowd. It will attract some people that wouldn't normally play this type of game, but (at least in my opinion) it is intended to woo the wargaming crowd.

Best way to put it really

[VanorDM 11,599]

They need to understand the scope of what they are playing.

No they really don't. We're talking about completely subjective opinions and preference here and as such the fact that Armada may be on par or even faster than other games means nothing, because those people don't play those other games either. So if they aren't interested in Armada because it takes to long, pointing out how it's on par if not faster than other games they won't play doesn't change anything.

I agree that Armada is aimed more at the traditional wargamer market then X-Wing was, people for whom, a 3x6 table is not only available it actually means they have extra space for cards. Because us wargamers are used to 4x6 tables if not bigger.

[Lyraeus 4,759]

They need to understand the scope of what they are playing.

No they really don't. We're talking about completely subjective opinions and preference here and as such the fact that Armada may be on par or even faster than other games means nothing, because those people don't play those other games either. So if they aren't interested in Armada because it takes to long, pointing out how it's on par if not faster than other games they won't play doesn't change anything.I agree that Armada is aimed more at the traditional wargamer market then X-Wing was, people for whom, a 3x6 table is not only available it actually means they have extra space for cards. Because us wargamers are used to 4x6 tables if not bigger.

It's not "subjective". As stated X-Wing is a board game. It is meant to be played on the space of a board game. Go look at Tickets to Ride, Settlers of Catan, etc and you will see that the space of play (including player areas) is roughly the size of an X-Wing game.

Armada, as it has been stated is a wargame. These are games meant to be played on big areas. They are all bigger than 3x3 and are longer games. Armada is luxurious in the regards that it is a fast paced war game compared to all the others out there. Look at Dropzone Commander, 40K, Warma chine, etc. Those are War games, they are big play area, long turns etc.

[VanorDM 11,599]

As stated X-Wing is a board game.

That's debatable. Table size does not a wargame make. It also doesn't change the fact that if someone thinks Armada takes to long then they aren't going to care how much faster it is then some other game. Because they're not interested in any game that takes that long to play.

It's like trying to convince someone that they would like the taste of a given food because it's a bit sweeter than some other food they don't like. If they don't like the taste of X, they are not going to be likely to like the taste of Y just because it's a bit sweater.

You're trying to convince someone that they'll like something that's slightly different than something they know they already don't like.

If someone is interested in a wargame based on capital ships, then it's highly unlikely that they'll find the time it takes to be an issue in the first place. The people who will have issues with it,are not the primary market for the game.

And yes it is very much subjective. All opinions are by their very nature subjective. If I think Armada takes to look to play, then that is an opinion, and how long it takes to play some other game doesn't matter in the least.

I mean do you honestly think that if someone says 'Armada looks cool, but the game takes to long to play' you're going to change their opinion about that by pointing out how other games that they don't play either, because they take to long are actually even longer to play?

Edited June 17, 2015 by VanorDM

[Forgottenlore 9,801]

As stated X-Wing is a board game. It is meant to be played on the space of a board game. Go look at Tickets to Ride, Settlers of Catan, etc and you will see that the space of play (including player areas) is roughly the size of an X-Wing game.

Armada, as it has been stated is a wargame. These are games meant to be played on big areas. They are all bigger than 3x3 and are longer games. Armada is luxurious in the regards that it is a fast paced war game compared to all the others out there. Look at Dropzone Commander, 40K, Warma chine, etc. Those are War games, they are big play area, long turns etc.

 

 

X-wing is not a board game, it is a miniatures wargame. It is a miniatures wargame that is simple and fast enough to appeal to board game players as well as wargamers. That is why it is so popular. (one of the reasons). Armada does not have that, therefore it is not going to be as popular, which was the original question.

 

Twilight Imperium is a board game, you really need a 6x4 space for it. Size table needed to play does not define game genre.

 

finally, even if your post above was completely true, so what? No one here is arguing that Armada is not a good game, or that it doesn't nail the flavor it was going for, or that it shouldn't have been made bigger and slower. All that is being said is that it IS bigger and slower (something you agree with) and that therefore it will not appeal to some of the people that play x-wing. The reasons it is bigger and slower are irrelevant to the topic of this thread, only that it is.