ACE 2026 Review, Part 2: Ships, Squadrons, and Upgrades

Last time, we looked at the rules and objectives. Now for the components. I'm not going to review everything inherited from ARC and Legacy all over again: I already covered ARC's first ships, Legacy Wave 0, and Legacy Wave 1's Empire and Rebels, Republic, and CIS. Go back and read those if you want the full card-by-card reactions. We'll revisit some of the same ground here because the new prices change the comparisons.

Republic ships: cheaper, but why only these?

Within the faction, I think these reductions are broadly fine. Step back and look at Armada as a whole, though, and the selection feels odd. There are plenty of ships and upgrades elsewhere that could use similarly modest attention. Why isn't there a more coherent pass across the whole game? Presumably that was outside the release's scope—but why make the scope so narrow in the first place? Baffling.

Anyway. Here's what changed.

Three Arquitens variants

The Legacy Assault Cruiser falls from 49 to 45, the Legacy Escort Cruiser from 54 to 51, and ARC's Light Cruiser from 52 to 49. Those are attractive numbers given the titles and upgrade combinations on offer. The Legacy ships in particular already had plenty going for them; I was worried about the Legacy ships' Salvo and flak even at their old price. The ARC Light Cruiser is still the more peculiar, constrained design, but three points off makes its favorite tricks easier to fit.

Will the cheaper Arqs crowd out other Republic small ships? I doubt it. The Pelta brings Fleet Support and a very different sort of value. Consulars remain cheaper building blocks if you're trying to reach the magic number: seven ships.

If that sounds oddly specific, here's the short version. At seven ships you start to recover some of the old multiple-small-unit game: enough activations that a fleet with, say, four ships can struggle to keep pace, even with pass tokens. That's a simplification, but it explains why the difference between a cheap Consular and a more capable Arquitens matters beyond the price of a single hull. As a lifelong abuser of activation advantage, I'm not entirely sure I want that old world back.

So yes, the Arquitens cuts make those ships more tempting, perhaps very tempting in some builds. But they don't erase the reasons to take Peltas or Consulars. They give GAR more ways to build a fleet, and I like that.

Venator Imperator Refit: 100 → 95

I called the Imperator the conservative Venator variant when it arrived. The released version was a competent brawler, but also the dullest of the ideas that could have filled this space—and still quite expensive. Five points off is welcome. It makes the familiar ordnance-and-Thermals package easier to justify, even if it doesn't make the ship any more imaginative. Good price change; still a boring ship.

Republic Victory I: 73 → 71

The GAR Vic-I had already come down once, and now it loses another two points. Next to the other new Republic prices, I'm not convinced it has become any more attractive. Two points don't fix the awkward speed and turning, and the Acclamator-II is now cheaper by four.

Then again, I'm a lifelong Victory hater. There may be gold here for somebody with more patience. I won't be the one mining it.

Acclamator-II: 71 → 67

This one needed help. The Acclamator-II looked overpriced beside the Munificent Star Frigate and the previously discounted Acclamator-I. At 67, it is a more credible choice. Add Thermal Shields and you're at 72 points, just one more than the new Vic-I. The Clam can also go speed 3, which is no small thing.

Can it turn at that speed? Well, no. But the Victory can't turn either, and at least the Clam can get somewhere it needs to be or run away on one hull. My old concerns about how much an upgraded medium ship costs, and how hard it is to keep that front arc on target, haven't vanished. The new base price gives the Acclamator-II more room to work with.

Venator-I: 90 → 86

Also deserved. In my Republic ship review, I argued that the Venator-I needed roughly a three-to-five-point reduction. ACE gives it four. Its missing Defensive Retrofit slot remains a real limitation, but 86 makes the Fleet Command and SPHA-T options easier to consider alongside the Venator-II.

The Pelta Medical Frigate: still waiting

One small omission: I would have trimmed the Medical Pelta by a point, maybe two, to narrow the efficiency gap with the Transport. It's hardly a crisis, and both Peltas are useful ships. But if we're taking the time to fine-tune GAR costs, this felt like an easy one to include.

Squadrons: some winners, some odd ducks

ACE's squadron changes range from a keyword rewrite that affects several aces to a brand-new CIS Moralo Eval. Here are the ones that caught my eye.

Screen and the squadrons that have it

Belbullab-22. The improved Screen, together with its earlier reduction from 15 to 14 points, puts the Belbullab in a much better place on paper. I still struggle to find a job for it in faction. Fourteen points is a lot for a CIS squadron with no anti-ship firepower. What am I protecting it for—Relay 1? Nah. I would have loved to see this new Screen on a Hyena bomber instead. The Belbullab is much improved, but remains an odd duck.

Darth Vader (TIE Advanced). First he dropped from 21 to 20, then Escort became Screen, and now Screen itself is better. This is where the keyword really shines. Vader is cheap for what he does, tough with two Braces, and hits like a truck. He has some similarities to the Belbullab in raw stats, but his defense tokens and special ability give the opponent a very good reason to try to kill him. The new Screen makes that harder. Vader is in a very good spot.

General Grievous. The CIS answer to Vader benefits for much the same reason: he is a valuable squadron you actually want to keep alive. Relay adds utility, though his special ability is a little weaker than Vader's. At 22 points I could imagine him at 21, but that's a minor quibble. The Screen change does much more for Grievous than it does for the generic Belbullab. Good stuff.

Shadow Squadron and the TIE Phantom. Shadow likes the new Screen, but the comparison with its generic chassis is awkward. The regular Phantom gains Dodge 1 and falls from 14 to 13, while Shadow stays at 15. Is that caution about Sloane and TIE Fighter spam? Perhaps. I'd have liked to see Shadow at 14, though it isn't a major complaint.

 

Wat Tambor. Screen plus Escort was already a distinctive combination, and the new Screen makes it more valuable. At 18 points, he's cheaper than Grievous, but he doesn't hit as hard and, yes, he has that Evade instead of a double Brace. Here, at least, Evade can work layered with Dodge, so it sucks a bit less, I guess.

Haor Chall: finally a reason to worry

The Haor Chall Prototypes drop from 16 to 13 points and get a new ability: when an enemy squadron at distance 1 activates, Haor Chall may make a Counter 3 attack against it, then suffers one damage. I used the old version many times in campaign play. I can count on one hand how often its ability triggered, and on one finger how often it made a big difference (it killed a ship, yay!). 

So old HC: you will not be missed!

I'm normally wary of self-damage on a three-hull squadron. But CIS already has a Hyena with a similar theme, and you don't have to trigger the ability. The opponent still has to think about it. Frankly, a 13-point Scatter ace would be exciting even without the new text. Add TI-99's ability, and you can get to a hilarious Counter 6 with Swarm (assuming Haor Chall hasn't already activated). 

This is easily one of my favorite changes in the release: the CIS version of Valen Rudor, only with suicidal tendencies.

Other aces and generics

Kanan Jarrus. Same cost, but one Brace becomes a Scatter. We know how annoying a four-hull Scatter ace can be to remove. Kanan is slow, but Cloak and Rogue help with that. He's at his best alongside ARC's Draven, of course, yet he's also a solid, relatively affordable addition to a group of Scatter aces.

Kit Fisto. Another price cut, this time from 24 to 22. It's a good change, but I still struggle to put him in a list. That is less about Kit being objectively bad and more about the ace cap: whose slot does he take? Perhaps I'm still thinking of him as a 26-point squadron. Twenty-two is much easier to consider, though a true Scatter would have changed the calculation more. Better, but probably not transformative.

Lambda and VCX-100. Both Strategic generics lose some of their old token manipulation and each falls from 15 to 14. I use very little Strategic these days, and this trade won't make me reach for either one more often. The VCX remains the better squadron of the two.

Matchstick. Down from 16 to 14: dirt cheap for six hull and two Braces. He's Heavy, however, and I find his ability only so-so. Fine, I guess, but not blowing me away.

Moralo Eval (CIS). This is actually new to Community Edition, not an old ARC or Legacy release getting adjusted. For 22 points you get Bomber, Grit, Rogue, two blue anti-ship dice, seven hull, and one Brace. Speed 3 is fine. Think of him as a better Bossk unless you specifically need an ace hunter. His ability to move and attack when an enemy ship ends up nearby is especially well designed: Grit helps him get into position, while an opponent can tie him down with multiple squadrons or avoid presenting the trigger in the first place. Strong, flavorful, and with real counterplay. A good addition to CIS.

Oddball. Grit should make it easier to use his ability, which I appreciate. Still, 20 points is a lot for a speed-2 bomber with one Brace and an Evade. The change helps, but it still doesn't quite get him there for me (pretty sure he was designed and priced around the OLD Intel keyword).

YV-666. Losing Heavy makes it more attractive as a squadron-control piece. It remains speed 2, with no anti-ship firepower, at 15 points a copy. That's a substantial investment for such a narrow job.

Upgrades: good rescues, and one big worry

Admiral Tarkin (30 → 26). Good call. Is four points enough? I don't think so. Commanders whose main job is handing out tokens suffer from more than a high sticker price. You can find tokens elsewhere and bring a commander who changes how your fleet fights or survives. Tarkin has to compete with that opportunity cost. Twenty-six helps, but I'm still not sold.

Barriss Offee (6 → 3). A surprisingly large cut, and the more I think about it, the more I like it. At three points she becomes a real defensive option for a small or medium ship, rather than an interesting card you set aside when building the fleet. Unexpected, but potentially impactful.

Bomber Command Center. The reroll now helps Assault squadrons as well as Bombers. Simple, sensible, and exactly the sort of support Assault needed to be more consistent. This feels most significant for CIS, particularly TF-1726 fleets.

Clone Commander Wolffe (6 → 4). If you're committed to a GAR Assault/Raid plan, Wolffe is one of the cards you want, and Bomber Command Center's new Assault reroll helps too. But he still costs four points and an Officer slot, while the Republic's Raid tools remain underwhelming. Two points less makes the solution cheaper; it doesn't make the whole plan especially compelling.

Damage Control Officer. The card still lets a Contain stop critical effects, but now you can exhaust it while resolving Contain to reduce the damage cards dealt by one. That gives DCO a life beyond matchups where you're worried about a particular crit. I can see it on an Interdictor or MC75, and it's cheap enough that even a smaller ship with one Contain might consider it.

I'm less comfortable with what happens when this joins the wider defensive ecosystem. Thermal Shields, Expert Shield Tech, Projection Experts, repairs, and now the new Point Defense Ion Cannons can all help keep damage from sticking. DCO might be perfectly fine by itself. The cumulative effect is what worries me.

Dual Turbolaser Turrets. Losing Modification is technically a buff. How many ships that wanted Dual Turbos were also desperate to fit another Modification? Not many, I suspect. Fine, but largely whatever.

Hyperwave Signal Boost. This goes from nearly useless to genuinely interesting. During the Squadron Phase it can let nearby generic AI squadrons activate as though commanded, at the cost of treating their printed speed as 2. That's a clever way to give CIS a taste of Rogue without handing its whole AI wing unrestricted movement and attacks. Refreshing the card also asks you to pay for repeated use. A powerful idea with sensible brakes. Well played, ACE.

Nav Team. New version starts with a Nav token, gains a token refresh requirement, and can exhaust during Determine Course to add a click of yaw. You can spend its tokens to ready it. Flexible, limited, and built from mechanics players already understand. I like it.

Would I take it over Engine Techs? Usually not. Nav Team is getting close to a real choice, but in most fleets where I want this kind of help, I would still pay the full eight points for Engine Techs.

Phylon Q7 Tractor Beams. Another card losing Modification. That makes sense and may matter a little more here than it does for Dual Turbos. A useful adjustment, though hardly a headline.

Plo Koon (26 → 24). Potentially a strong commander, but at standard fleet sizes I find it hard to fit enough of all the pieces he wants. Two points off helps, and several Republic ships are cheaper too—just not especially the ones that make his plan sing. A modest improvement that leaves him slightly shafted by the rest of this update.

Point Defense Ion Cannons. Here is my big objection. I disliked the old, unlimited defensive reroll and wanted a version with a meaningful limit. ACE gives us one: while defending at close range or distance 1, discard a Concentrate Fire token or exhaust the card to reduce total damage by one, with a refresh cost for further use. The limit is welcome. The effect is not.

Do we really need another direct damage reduction card? We already have Thermal Shields, Expert Shield Tech, and now a more useful Damage Control Officer. Add Projection Experts and repairs to keep those ships going, perhaps even the new Jamming Barrier, and we are piling mitigation on mitigation. Let's throw zero dice and do no damage, guys! All right, that's an exaggeration—slightly—but I'm deeply skeptical of this direction. A defensive Ion slot upgrade is a good concept. This implementation pushes the game toward the sort of grinding, low-damage exchanges I least want to play.

Slaved Turrets. The restriction now says a ship cannot attack more than once during its activation, rather than once per round. That lets a ship make a Salvo attack outside its activation without losing the card's extra red die when attacking ships. Small wording change, good result.

Where this leaves me

There is plenty to like: cheaper Republic ships open up builds, Screen makes several aces more appealing, Haor Chall is delightful, and cards such as Barriss and Hyperwave might finally see the table. The Legacy Wave 0 and 1 components are also now part of the shared Community Edition environment, which is a win in itself.

But I still don't understand why the points pass stops where it does, and I worry about layering more damage prevention into an already durable game. PD Ions is the change I'd most like to be wrong about. Some of these judgments will change once we've played more games with the release. For now, the good clearly outweighs the bad—but I won't pretend every choice here makes me happy.

Next we'll wrap up by (briefly) going over the Legacy Wave 0/1 that are rolled into ACE, in particular tweaks to the two commanders, one of which completely redeems a wee blunder I made in my Ki-Adi-Mudi builds in a previous post. Mohahahaha.

ACE 2026 Review, Part 1: Rules and Objectives

 

ARC and Legacy joining forces under Armada Community Edition (ACE) still makes me happy. I said my piece about the merger recently, so I won't repeat the whole argument. People who care about Armada are now pulling in the same direction, and that's a very good place to start.

Of course, a united team still has to make good decisions. Over this series I'll work through the 2026 Community Edition changes in some detail: the good, the bad, and the ugly. Spoiler: there's considerably more good than ugly. This first post covers the general rules and objectives; ships, squadrons, upgrades, and the rest can have their own turns in the spotlight.

These are first impressions based on the ACE changelog and the updated rules, rather than verdicts from a pile of games. I reserve the right to change my mind once someone has moved a purrgil through my fleet.

The general rules

No flotilla objective ships. ACE puts this in the general rules and spells it out on Advanced Gunnery, Most Wanted, and Intel Sweep. A little redundant, perhaps, but these objectives have sat unchanged for years. Making the restriction impossible to miss is probably wise.

Most Wanted is the obvious case: the second player can no longer nominate a cheap flotilla, enjoy the offensive benefit, and hide their own objective ship behind the fleet. Intel Sweep now needs a real ship to collect tokens instead of a cheap flotilla that can be surprisingly difficult to reach and kill. Advanced Gunnery is subtler: the first player must nominate a combat ship even if none is an appealing candidate and they'd much rather risk a flotilla. All three now ask players to put something meaningful on the line.

I find it odd, however, that this rule isn't more general in nature. You can still use flotillas for Opening Salvo and Capture the VIP because those use different wording (they are not objective ships; they just get objective tokens and can pick up objective tokens). Minor, but kind of weird if you ask me.

Moving obstacles ignore squadrons until they reach their destination. When an objective moves an obstacle towards a point or another obstacle, squadrons no longer stop that movement. If the obstacle overlaps squadrons at the end, the opposing player places them touching it. It was far too easy to block purrgils, or moving obstacles in something like Doomed Station, with a few squadrons. This makes a lot of sense. The purrgil actually gets to migrate.

No deploying ships on obstacles. Hyperspace Assault and Admiral Raddus are finally consistent on this point. It also offers a little counterplay to Raddus: a skilled opponent can use obstacles to screen some potential arrival positions. It's hardly a complete answer to Raddus, but it's a useful option and a good small change.

Strategic. Shifting an objective token now takes the place of attacking during that squadron's activation. If you command a Strategic squadron from a ship, it can move and shift a token. In the Squadron Phase, you have to choose between moving into position and shifting a token you're already near. Unless, of course, you've given your VCXs Rogue with Hera, but that's a pretty expensive solution! This is a good nerf to an ability that could feel oppressive, and ACE softens it with a one-point reduction for both the Lambda and VCX-100.

Screen. The old version depended, for most practical purposes, on how accommodating your opponent was. Except for a perfect alpha strike against a careless opponent, Screen offered very little. Now it checks for up to two friendly non-Screen squadrons at distance 1 of the defender, giving you much more control over whether the protection works. The old Screen could reach Dodge 3 (despite what the changelog says); the new one tops out at Dodge 2, a sensible limit now that the ability is much easier to use. Screen can finally do the job its name suggests. I love this change.

Objectives: more reasons to open the binder

The broad idea of tuning underused objectives is sound. If a small handful of objectives dominate selection, a lot of interesting cards might as well not exist. Eight objectives get substantive adjustments here, while Advanced Gunnery, Most Wanted, and Intel Sweep also repeat the new flotilla restriction on their cards.

That said, if any of the changes are controversial, it's these. Some of these objectives have been around since 2015 and have never been touched by FFG/AMG. In my not-so-humble opinion, however, tweaking objectives is ESSENTIAL for the game's continued health. We can't keep playing the same ones over and over and over. And by extension, we're also limiting the viability of some fleet types and restricting future design space. So the naysayers are wrong, and this is the right thing to do. Search your feeling or something and you'll know it's true.

Advanced Gunnery and Most Wanted put the no-flotillas rule directly on the cards. That is useful for clarity, even if the general rule already says it. I do wonder why their scoring was left alone when ACE revisited Opening Salvo's. It feels a little inconsistent to reconsider the risk and reward for one familiar red objective but not the others.

Intel Sweep gets the same non-flotilla wording. The scoring has always been fixed, so there's nothing comparable to revisit there. The important change is that the token collector has to be a combat ship, which can put it at risk or draw it out of optimum position if you decide to use it for token picking.

Marked for Destruction always felt almost good enough. It came from Rebellion in the Rim, where the smaller 3×3-foot battlefield gave its purrgils rather more influence. On a standard 6×3 table, it struggled to have the same impact. ACE may finally have fixed that. The second player now places all obstacles, including the two purrgils, and an attack against an objective ship can use the critical effect to move a nearby purrgil. That can damage a ship and score a victory token as part of the same play. Better yet for the second player, the damage card is faceup if the affected ship belongs to the first player. That's potentially much nastier than an ordinary facedown card. Tokens also rise from 15 to 20 points each. Full control of the obstacle setup, a way to move the purrgils when it matters, more dangerous damage, and better scoring make this a genuinely interesting option for the right fleet.

 

Opening Salvo finally specifies a ship's first non-Salvo attack. Small change, long overdue. The scoring revision is more important: at game's end, the second player gains a token for each damaged enemy ship still on the table, and tokens are worth 20 points. Previously, having this objective turned against you could produce a brutal scoring swing. The new endgame points give the second player a way to claw some of that back while retaining the objective's shooting benefit. That can matter a great deal in a tournament, where the margin matters as well as the win. Opening Salvo looks much less dodgy to take now.

Targeting Beacons is improved, but I don't love the design. The old version placed four beacons; ACE removes the two placed by the first player, which often ended up hidden in distant corners. I understand the impulse. But the new critical effect belongs to every ship: against a defender at distance 1–2 of a beacon, a player can cancel the attack dice to deal one faceup damage card and gain a 15-point victory token. Both players therefore have scoring opportunities, even though only the second player now places beacons. Letting the first player place one or two would have offered an interesting gamble: hide them safely or put them where both sides might exploit them. The revised card is better, but it feels a little dull and inelegant next to that possibility.

Fire Lanes lets the first player shift each objective token up to distance 1 after the second player places them. It's a small setup change, but makes the objective more consistent with others that give both players some say in placement. The bigger change is scoring: tokens drop from 15 to 10 points. With three tokens in play, the theoretical haul falls from 45 to 30 points per round. That's still enormous, but at least it's closer to other objectives.

I do wish ACE had also dealt with the awkward token-and-base interactions. Using Strategic to move tokens under ships or squadron bases, or using squadron overlaps to leave squadrons sitting on top of tokens, is pretty lame. A general clarification on what may overlap what would have been welcome here.

Jamming Barrier was workable before, but niche. ACE replaces the old attack-pool halving with obstruction, a familiar mechanic that fits much better. The second player assigns a token to each of their ships; when one is targeted, it can discard its token to remove three dice from the attack pool, on top of any obstruction the barrier provides. That's a lot of defensive power without blunting the second player's own attacks.

The clever part is the leash. Like Fleet in Being, the bonus asks you to keep your ships in the right area: a ship that ends a round beyond distance 3 of a barrier token in the play area loses its token. Each token still held at game's end is worth 15 points. So the second player can protect a ship now, save its token to score later, or lose the opportunity by moving away. That's a much more interesting objective than the old version. I expect Jamming Barrier to see considerably more play, quite possibly in competitive fleets.

Dangerous Territory gets an elegant little addition: a second-player ship at distance 1–2 of an obstacle can add a click of yaw during Determine Course. Suddenly this isn't merely an objective about collecting points. The terrain gives only the second player a tangible navigation advantage, opening up more dynamic ways to fly and fight around obstacles. Imagine pairing it with Admiral Coburn. If only I could force my opponent to pick it! Great work by ACE: a small rule that makes the objective much more versatile without making it complicated.

Hyperspace Migration was one of the clunkiest objectives in Armada, and somehow it still is. I've played since launch, and I have to read this card several times to untangle its timing, placement, and scoring. What chance does a newer player have? I appreciate ACE trying to improve it, and the objective can produce an interesting game, but this much opaque text does the game no favors.

There are good changes in here. The two objective tokens that anchor the purrgils' route now have setup instructions suited to a 6×3 table rather than Rebellion in the Rim's 3×3 battlefield. Centering the purrgils on the line between those tokens makes placement clearer. The new rule that squadrons cannot stop moving obstacles also helps the migration actually happen. Requiring a purrgil to move at least distance 1 before it hands out tokens means ships cannot simply box it in and farm points.

The victory token value is halved to 10 points, but a ship can apparently cash in an objective token at the end of the Status Phase and collect another when a purrgil moves at the end of that same round. In that situation, the lower value may not reduce the scoring rate much at all—provided the purrgils keep moving. There is a worthwhile objective somewhere in here. I just wish it didn't take a seminar to play it. If it can't be made less clunky than this, I would almost rather leave it out.

Navigational Hazards has one change, but it's a substantial one: at the end of each round, the second player moves all five obstacles other than the station. That's real control over the battlefield, even if it doesn't quite reach Infested Fields levels of appeal. It puts Navigational Hazards back in the running, and it may be an even better Admiral Coburn objective than Dangerous Territory.

First verdict

My favorites are the flotilla restriction, the Strategic trade-off, the Screen rewrite, and the new lease on life for Marked for Destruction, Jamming Barrier, and Dangerous Territory. Opening Salvo's scoring change is another welcome correction, and Navigational Hazards is finally worth another look.

The ugly? Hyperspace Migration remains a rules-reading exercise, Fire Lanes still invites awkward token overlaps, and Targeting Beacons misses an opportunity to give the first player a more interesting placement choice. On balance, ACE seems to be taking objectives seriously as part of fleet design and table play, which is exactly what I want from a living Armada ruleset.

Next time: The rest of the update. Republic ship points. Tweaked commanders. And more.