If all players are seasoned vets that know their lists and the rules that all the cards on the table are employing well it can take an hour, otherwise who knows? I've had 100 point games take well into the 2-3 hour mark at times based on game knowledge or just whether or not new and adventurous things are being tested.
Makes sense. Whether playing a table top or board game, you've also got to take into account the people you're playing with. You've got the one type of player who's ready to go and moves quickly on one end of the spectrum, and the type who takes forever to make their moves/take their turn, etc. on the other. If you're playing that 2nd type, a game (all be it, any game) will take longer as well.
Movement of ships in X-Wing takes time to get good at too, and depending on your squad build can be anywhere from painstakingly difficult to driving a bus down an empty 5 lane highway.
How does squad building affect movement to make it so difficult? I've only seen bits of games be played and watched a few online tutorials.
If you've seen the new movie, think about Poe. He's an ace. A lone ship, whipping around the enemy's fighters wreaking havoc and doing all the sweetest maneuvers doing it. Both systems have special characters and fluffy ways of building your squadrons, but there's something specifically satisfying about having lone ships just rip through the enemy lines without being touched (Soontir Fel, Whisper, Darth Vader, Tycho Celchu, Jake Farrell, that sort of thing). I don't think I would ever describe the pilot team of a large ship as aces despite them even potentially being the best at their jobs.
I was more thinking about aces embedded in squadrons like Luke or Wedge, etc.
However, I do get what you're saying about the "ace" feel in X-wing. Just as X-wing would have to imagine their dog fight being part of a larger fleet -v- fleet battle, Armada would have to imagine a dog fight happening between opposing squadrons (i.e. you don't have a dog fight but just roll dice for stands of fighters that just sit there, and move each squadron strength dials as you take/inflict losses).
Have you taken in the Imperial Raider for X-Wing? We still get massive ships that move uniquely and use totally different rules and even the same play area. Not to mention it comes with a TIE Advanced and some awesome pilots for it plus an absolute ton of rockin' upgrade cards. There's even still a large planning ahead factor to the X-Wing huge ships in that you have to plan your energy use; something I find way more thematic for big ships.
I haven't actually played either game. My gaming group was almost exclusively 40k. After a time (I played from the tail end of 2nd ed through the beginning of 6th), the group began to dwindle. Some got into warmachine/hordes, but I never really got into that (partly because I'm not a huge skirmish guy, and partly because of life chaos/business). With X-wing or Armada I would be looking to chart new ground and spark interest. Most of what I've done so far, has been to research online and watch youtube game reviews, game comparisons, & battle reports, etc.
While x-wing does have physically large ships, I was referring to the nostalgic feeling I get when seeing Star Destroyers on the big screen or on the table top.
This sounds like you want people to convince you to play Armada because that's the game you actually like.
Again, it sounds like you just want to play Armada. What's really the point of this thread?
Well based on what you and Fallen had said, I did come to the conclusion (at this point anyway) that Armada looks like it might be the game I want
to play, but that X-wing looks like the game I can afford
to play (both with time and money). However, to be fair, I did say
that after looking at 4 categories (game type, playing time, scale, & start up cost) that things were tied 2 to 2.
Also, it sounds like you're pretty biased, and would take any answer other than my saying "I want to play X-wing," as my seriously not having considered both sides.
Not a problem though. I asked you guys to "fight," and wanted people to truly tell me what they think. You've definitely been doing that, and I really appreciate it. Thank you!
You may not believe me, but I truly am open/torn at this point (i.e. thus my saying things were tied 2 to 2). X-wing has beautiful models, and fits within the financial and time constraints I have, but lacks the large capital ship fleet battles I would enjoy.
X-Wing will never have capital ships but there's still tons of fleet play, albeit at a higher financial and storage requirement.
Yeah, I was thinking about that. Having to transport/safely store even one large X-wing ship (much less several) looks like it would be both costly and a bummer.
Given that both systems are ever expanding and that Disney now has a hand in how it's released: there will always be more to buy.
Ha ha, so true. Disney is a marketing giant. I was more meaning that with these types of games you are always adding more models. As such, I was wondering if in the end, the total cost was about the same (even if the start up cost wasn't)?
Start proxying cards you want to try out for either system. Print them off (all available card's graphics are easily findable online, FFG doesn't hide their rules) or just write the effects down on a piece of paper, but don't fall into the trap of buying ships because they have absolutely key cards for certain ships (Starviper for Autothrusters and the K-Wing for Twin Laser Turret spring to mind, though they are both fun ships to play in my opinion).
I'm a huge fan of proxying/play testing before actually investing money. Probably because I have so little money.
I have to save up for games like this. The good news? It gives me lots of time to research.
TBH it does sound like you want to play Armada, but the initial cost and time investment is putting you off.
Yes, I think for the most part that's true. The model quality overall though is greater for X-wing. It really is a bummer to me that Armada fighters don't come pre-painted. However, overall, I really love capital ships and enjoy larger strategic table top games -vs- skirmish. My closest gaming buddy though, is leaning towards X-wing. So... things are still pretty open/up in the air for me.
I think the simplest question, and the most important one, is what is played locally?
Great question. A few years back my absolutely favorite FLGS (sadly) went under. There's another game store in town, but I've just never really connected with it. The owner's not too friendly, and while I probably shouldn't compare/give them a chance, it's just not the same. As such, most gaming is/has been with good friends. Currently neither X-wing or Armada is being played with those friends, and I would be striking new ground/hoping to spark interest. One of my closest friends though, is interested in launching into one of these two games with me. Right now he's leaning a slightly toward X-wing, but like me, is not 100% either.
I play x-wing, because all the local gamers play it. They also play Armada, but when I go down the club, I am much more likely to get an x-wing game.
Whats the most popular system locally, or are you lucky enough to be able to influence and drive forward a game system?
I have some influence. Years ago my close friend and I got everyone interested in 40K, but that was before GW became increasingly less customer friendly. I think people would be interested in playing either of these game systems if they started seeing them be played on the tabletop.
Armada is Strategic, X-wing Tactical. X-wing is much more dependent on card synergy tricks, and can be less fun sometimes because of that.
How so? Do you mean that card synergy lends itself to exploitation and cheesy power gaming, or do you mean it leads to complexity which really slows the game down, or something else?
Armada can be less fun depending on the size and composition of ships. The bigger ships sometimes get overwhelming.
Are you referring here to how many order disks they have/how far out in advance you have to plan?