Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Officially Announced:

 Manchu wrote:
https://www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/news/2015/4/6/here-they-come/

Just got some exciting news that Wave 2 of Star Wars Armada has been confirmed with new ships including ISD and Mon Calamari Cruiser!

Here are the Ships coming in Wave 2











Who else is excited by this news?

Because scale is for girls.


I wanted to be excited about this game, but the lack of adherance to even a semblance of scale killed it for me.

 insaniak wrote:
Because scale is for girls.


I wanted to be excited about this game, but the lack of adherance to even a semblance of scale killed it for me.

This.

Even avoided the big ships in X-Wing because of it.

Guess I am not familiar with scale on this game...but price scared me off of Armada.

Scale is in unrealistic goal. Think about it....

Well that escalated quickly. And that's a Home One cruiser. Interesting.

Still, the scale thing kinda kills it for me, as does the announcement of the new 40K space ship/planet conquering board game.

I don't think people can really say the scale is out until we see the ships for ourselves.

The only ships that looked out of scale was the Corvette and the squadrons and I understand why they would have done that for playability.

 Yak9UT wrote:
I don't think people can really say the scale is out until we see the ships for ourselves.

The Imperial Class Star Destroyer would have to be twice as long as the Victory Class Star Destroyer to be in scale.

 Ghaz wrote:

 Yak9UT wrote:
I don't think people can really say the scale is out until we see the ships for ourselves.

The Imperial Class Star Destroyer would have to be twice as long as the Victory Class Star Destroyer to be in scale.

VSD is 900 meters while the ISD is 1600 meters so it seems feasible to be able to match that in scale.

I think if they did not meet scale it would either be for cost or for playability, but I have a good feeling it will be sufficient in scale for people.

base of the ISD is 192mm on the long side. VSD base is 102mm so those will be in scale.

expecting in scale in general ... well is just stupid as it wouldnt fit on the board or limit the ammount of models.

 insaniak wrote:
Because scale is for girls.


I wanted to be excited about this game, but the lack of adherance to even a semblance of scale killed it for me.

What is this?

Seriously, what is it?

Especially coming from people who play a game where guns have a lower range than thrown footballs (assuming there's an accurate ground scale).

ANY space combat game should be played with grains of rice (or maybe grains of sand) on a gym floor if you want an accurate scale, otherwise you've already given up.

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:

 insaniak wrote:
Because scale is for girls.


I wanted to be excited about this game, but the lack of adherance to even a semblance of scale killed it for me.

What is this?

Seriously, what is it?

Especially coming from people who play a game where guns have a lower range than thrown footballs (assuming there's an accurate ground scale).

ANY space combat game should be played with grains of rice (or maybe grains of sand) on a gym floor if you want an accurate scale, otherwise you've already given up.

Hey, real men play games that are perfectly in scale.

Like Battletech.

Yeah, I don't personally get the obsession with scale when it wouldn't make sense to adhere to it (like it completely wouldn't in this case or else the big stuff would be way too big and the small stuff would be way too small).

I'd rather have a uniform sliding scale that allows me to play with both the biggest and smallest ships together than sticking rigidly to one scale and losing everything on the extremes.

I am very excited about Armada. The only issue I have is trying to figure out if I should wait to see how Halo plays, as I probably will end up getting into one or the other (but not both).

 yakface wrote:
if I should wait to see how Halo plays

Might as well pre-order Armada then. You can get Halo when SG comes out with the second edition next year.

 namiel wrote:
Scale is in unrealistic goal. Think about it....

It's unrealistic if you want to include everything from fighters through to 17km long capital ships in the same game, certainly. That's not really necessary though... but it seems that everyone who makes a Star Wars space battle game feels compelled to try to include everything in the same game, and so scale just goes straight out the window.

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
What is this?

Seriously, what is it?

Especially coming from people who play a game where guns have a lower range than thrown footballs (assuming there's an accurate ground scale).

ANY space combat game should be played with grains of rice (or maybe grains of sand) on a gym floor if you want an accurate scale, otherwise you've already given up.

The shortening of ranges in most 28-ish mm scale games is at least more or less consistent. I have no problem with scale being fudged where there is some consistency about it.

Completely ignoring scale between different models in a range because you want to fit something into a particular sized box, on the other hand, I just find irritating.


It's ok in a boardgame, but (for me) it breaks the illusion for a miniatures game.

I like BFG's answer to that, the ships were big enough to look cool but in game terms they were just a speck in the center of the base.

It allowed a game with big ship minis, planets etc and no nonsense about scale.

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
I like BFG's answer to that, the ships were big enough to look cool but in game terms they were just a speck in the center of the base.

It allowed a game with big ship minis, planets etc and no nonsense about scale.

Can't that same analogy just be used when playing just about every starship game? Or is just because they actually spelled that out in the rules that makes the difference?

With Armada, it looks like they have different base sizes to represent general classes of ships, so while the scale may not be accurate (as it cannot really be), I believe their goal was to make the scale of the ships within each base size to be accurate to each other…so where you have larger or smaller bases is where you get the 'cheat' between scale.

That's all I really care about. As long as there is rough consistency of scale between ships of comparable class, then I'm good to go, even if the different classes are out of scale with each other (due to practicality).

Don't care a thwack about scale, it's the general lack of ship options that has caused me to hold off on buying.

I'm sure once we get to about wave 8-10 and have a decent range of capital ships I'll dive in with both feet and drag in everyone within proximity...

The thing is, FFG made a big fuss about scale, and used it to guide design decisions, like this created Imperial Raider rather than a Lancer Frigate, because it would be out of scale. This isn't something the fans are asking them to be held to, it is something FFG has stated they want to be held to.

If it's important enough to dictate what ships they create, shouldn't it be important enough to be accurate?

Who cares that they replaced the Lancer? It was a dumb, ugly shop that only existed in now defunct extended universe.

they are cool....

but what killed it for me was its not "armada".

I wanted a fleet game - instead, I just got xwing with bigger ships.

(yes, the armada rules are actually pretty cool...but I wanted an Armada...)

There will always be lines of scale models for those that want them.

The Lancer frigate is a dumb looking penis shaped ship from the EU. It's gone and should stay that way. Most of the crap from the EU needs to do the same. I really wish they had given the E-Wing a redesign, for example, rather than giving us that blocky piece of garbage that no one would think was good looking except for those too mired in nostalgia. And the Assault Frigate I wish they'd just designed something as good looking as the new Imperial ship instead of using a reject from a random computer game.

We haven't seen pictures of these big ships next to other ships yet, but I'm fine with things being out of scale, so long as the game plays well.

 Gitzbitah wrote:
The thing is, FFG made a big fuss about scale, and used it to guide design decisions, like this created Imperial Raider rather than a Lancer Frigate, because it would be out of scale. This isn't something the fans are asking them to be held to, it is something FFG has stated they want to be held to.

If it's important enough to dictate what ships they create, shouldn't it be important enough to be accurate?

Thought that was only for X-Wing. I don't think they're holding Armada to the same standard, and I'm fine with that. Wizkids started their line with scale ships and the resulting TOS Enterprise is tossable and groan inducing.

Vertrucio wrote:There will always be lines of scale models for those that want them.

I'm not sure how that's relevant to someone wanting a miniatures game with miniatures to scale...

The Lancer frigate is a dumb looking penis shaped ship from the EU.

I would recommend you see a doctor if you think that the Lancer is what a penis looks like...

I really wish they had given the E-Wing a redesign, for example, rather than giving us that blocky piece of garbage that no one would think was good looking except for those too mired in nostalgia. And the Assault Frigate I wish they'd just designed something as good looking as the new Imperial ship instead of using a reject from a random computer game.

Does every ship have to look 'good'?


I'm totally fine with some ship designs looking ugly, particularly given how many of them are (in-universe) designed by non-humans, who would potentially have a very different idea of what is and isn't aesthetically pleasing. And different ideas of how relevant that is for warship design...


It seems fairly clear that FFG have no issue using EU designs, even just looking at this latest release.

 Stormonu wrote:
Thought that was only for X-Wing. I don't think they're holding Armada to the same standard, and I'm fine with that.

Exactly. They made a big deal about X-Wing being correctly scaled (some models are still wrong, but at least it looks pretty much correct on the table) but Armada was never intended to have a consistent scale.

 insaniak wrote:
It's unrealistic if you want to include everything from fighters through to 17km long capital ships in the same game, certainly. That's not really necessary though... but it seems that everyone who makes a Star Wars space battle game feels compelled to try to include everything in the same game, and so scale just goes straight out the window.

Everyone who makes a game besides FFG? Or is X-Wing not a space battle game?

And I don't really see why including the full range of ships is controversial. Players are going to expect them to be there, and will be disappointed if the iconic ship designs are missing. It might be a space battle game, but it isn't going to be Star Wars.

Completely ignoring scale between different models in a range because you want to fit something into a particular sized box, on the other hand, I just find irritating.

It's not just having a particular box size, it's about having a decent model at a sane price. True-scale Armada would either have tiny poorly-detailed small ships that would feel like a ripoff or giant star destroyers that nobody could afford. Nobody wants sand-grain sized fighter "models", and nobody wants $100+ star destroyers. The only solution is to give up on having a single scale for everything and accept that the models are just an approximation of the "real" battle.

 Peregrine wrote:
And I don't really see why including the full range of ships is controversial

I didn't say it was contraversial. I said it was a decision that makes it impossible to stick to a scale.

Players are going to expect them to be there, and will be disappointed if the iconic ship designs are missing.

But that's exactly the point... including iconic Star Wars ships is what makes it a Star Wars game, not including every Star Wars ship.

It's not just having a particular box size, it's about having a decent model at a sane price.

No, that's pretty much what I meant with the box comment.

They've decided that for the purposes of their game, the ships should all be around a certain size. And that's fine, so far as it goes, and I am not at all surprised that a lot of people seem to have no issue with that. It's just not a design decision that I'm personally a fan of.

True-scale Armada would either have tiny poorly-detailed small ships that would feel like a ripoff or giant star destroyers that nobody could afford. Nobody wants sand-grain sized fighter "models", and nobody wants $100+ star destroyers. The only solution is to give up on having a single scale for everything and accept that the models are just an approximation of the "real" battle.

That's a long way from being the 'only' solution.

The easy alternative would have been to base the game around a particular class size, and only produce ships that are viable around that size. Smaller ships could be built on squadron bases (ala the old Babylon 5 game) and fighters (if they wind up too small with the chosen capital ship class) simply dealt with through special rules rather than physical models on the table. After all, they already have a separate game dealing with fighter combat, if that's what you're after...

 insaniak wrote:
But that's exactly the point... including iconic Star Wars ships is what makes it a Star Wars game, not including every Star Wars ship.

Yes, but even if you only include the major ships from the movies and ignore all of the EU stuff there's a huge difference in scale. In fact, let's be really generous and ignore the fighters too, since we can just represent them as abstract squadron tokens instead of models. Oh, and let's save the Executor for a special "epic" game since the rebels don't have an equivalent ship without going into the EU. You still have to deal with the 1600m star destroyer and 150m corvette, and that's enough to break the idea of having a single scale for everything. If we assume the ~13cm YT-1300 model in X-Wing is around the upper limit for a practical model in a game like X-Wing and Armada* then the corvette would be a mere ~1.2cm long. IOW, it's going to be a vaguely corvette-shaped lump of plastic and you're going to feel like it's a blatant ripoff if it costs anywhere near the price of a full model (and it will have to because of all the tokens/bases/etc).

*The epic ships in X-Wing are bigger, and they're an awkward mess that you don't want in the core game. They also cost way more than most people are willing to pay.

The easy alternative would have been to base the game around a particular class size, and only produce ships that are viable around that size.

Great, now you no longer have the iconic ships and you have endless fan complaints about "where's my star destroyer". Good luck selling a bunch of EU stuff that hardly anyone recognizes.

Smaller ships could be built on squadron bases (ala the old Babylon 5 game) and fighters (if they wind up too small with the chosen capital ship class) simply dealt with through special rules rather than physical models on the table. After all, they already have a separate game dealing with fighter combat, if that's what you're after...

IOW, do exactly what FFG did with fighters. They're an abstract fighter token that doesn't share the same capital ship mechanics, the only difference is that they have some models on top of the token instead of just a picture of an x-wing or TIE fighter. If you really hate the fighters that much you can always just ask to remove them from the base and only play with the tokens.

I definitely get it, but I for one am very happy they decided to go with a mixed scale to be able to accommodate everything you see in the movies all at once, because that is what I want to play.

I never liked X-Wing just because I don't care much for dogfigther space combat (just not my cup of tea).

But the idea of being able to have fighters and capital ships and even the death star theoretically all at once is just super awesome, especially given the rules I've read about so far and the ability to take different pilots/commanders like you can X-Wing.

Just seems like a winner to me and this second wave of ships is definitely awesome looking as the Mon Calamari stuff is easily the best Rebel designs IMHO.

I'm not sure how that's relevant to someone wanting a miniatures game with miniatures to scale...

What you want, and what you get are two different things. And it's fine for you to want it. But every single damn thread posters like you throw a hissy fit in at the mention of Armada, it's the same tired hissy fit that I bet even you've made fun of others for doing the same for some other geekdom.

It's already been decided, and you've already expressed your opinion, and decision, not to get into the game.

I understand that this is a discussion forum, but there is a point where the constant repetition is no longer a discussion but a sounding box.

Does every ship have to look 'good'?

Really? You have to ask that question? Yes. Most resoundingly yes! If it doesn't look good, why would anyone ever buy it? Why would anyone have gone to see the original Star Wars?

How do you think Star Wars became a thing as popular as it was to spawn all these crappy additions? It's because almost everything in the movies looked great. They had had great artists and a great art director who literally went around with a chisel breaking off bits of ships, or entire ship models that weren't up to his standard of quality. Go look it up. That's what helped make Star Wars great, it was the ability for the people behind it not to simply tolerate a crappy looking design just because every other mediocre scifi movie of the time was doing the same.

And if you want to see what happens when you don't get that level of editorial and artistic control, just look at what happened to the prequels.

FFG, and any other director will use the EU designs that actually look good, or close enough to good (that HWK is kinda ugly). Where nothing fits, they'll make stuff up. After all, everything is made up

I agree with Vertrucio here.

There is no point complaining about a game you are not going to play or are interested in.

Frankly I think people shouldn't make too much criticism about it until they actually play it.

Just let people who are excited or interested have fun talking about it.

No point to keep talking about a game you are not interested.