Objectives and ARC – Part 3: Rebellion in the Rim

 

Now we arrive at the final set of published objectives: the 12 new cards introduced in Rebellion in the Rim.

And you know what? They’re actually pretty good.

It’s almost as if the designers at FFG finally sat down and asked: 

"What kinds of objectives are missing from the game? What holes are there in the current meta? And what would be both fun and competitive to play?"

The result is a surprisingly solid set of objectives. Some of these (Infested Fields, Volatile Deposits) have become staples in tournament lists. Others offer fun, flavorful mechanics with tactical depth—something the game needed more of. The only one I actively despise is Hyperspace Migration, and the only total dud is Fleet in Being, and that one isn't that bad, just not good 😆

This set also introduced three new obstacle types, all of which are tied to specific objectives:

• Gravity Rifts, which pull and push ships in dangerous ways.

• Space Slugs, which eat squadrons. (It’s in the name.)

• Space Whales, which move around and really don’t like being landed on.

Finally, keep in mind that RitR may have been designed primarily with a half-sized play area in mind. That may affect how some objectives scale to full tournament play, and we’ll flag it where relevant.

⚔️ Assault Objectives (Red) – Rebellion in the Rim

Unlike Corellian Conflict, the red objectives in RitR don’t suffer from outright bad design. None are broken. None are total garbage. Instead, they lean toward creative and thematic—though not all of them reach competitive viability. Let’s dig in.

---

Ion Storm

Tactical: Setup control of obstacles, slight edge later.
Scoring: Modest and contested.
Play Rate: Underused but not totally absent

This objective is solid. Second Player places all obstacles, which can be a big edge for terrain-heavy lists. Removing the station also helps certain builds. There’s real value here, but the actual scoring impact is pretty mild, and the interaction is often too subtle to justify the pick.

Fixes:

• Require spending 2 engineering points to remove an objective token, instead of removing it for free. This adds cost and weight to the decision.

• Optional: Introduce "Energy Fields" (a renamed version of dust fields) to spice things up:

When a ship ends its activation at Distance 1 of an Energy Field, its owner must discard 1 command token and suffer 1 damage.
Squadrons suffer 1 damage instead.

This isn’t necessary—but it would make for a fun thematic twist.

➡ Verdict: Fine as is.

---

Marked for Destruction

Tactical: Basically nil.
Scoring: Hard to achieve.
Play Rate: Very low but not zero

This is one of the most thematic objectives in the entire game. It’s fun, but even when played well, it's hard not to think another objective would have been better. It's not far from being good, however. If you've played it in RitR you're likely to have a rather higher opinion of it, as the smaller map makes the dust fields and space whale movement more impactful, and the scoring opportunities more frequent.

Let’s see if we can fix that without overcomplicating things or changing the flavor too much.

Fixes:

• Second Player places the objective token after fleet deployment, letting them bait or threaten better.

• Require the Purrgil to always move toward a token if it exists. Prevents it from floating off into irrelevance.

• Ensure Ezra and similar effects can interact with the token—it’s thematic and encourages creative plays.

This won't do much, to be honest, but I'm out of ideas without a radical rework.

➡ Verdict: Worth saving.

---

Rift Assault

Tactical: Dice fixing edge to the 2nd player.
Scoring: Usually moderate and balanced.
Play Rate: Sometimes.

There’s not much wrong here. It introduces a fun, dangerous Gravity Rift, has real counterplay, and both players can score—the Second Player’s edge is slim, which is probably a reason you don't see this too often.

Fun fact: This objective is slightly less strong in RitR since the obstacles are more packed and it's thus easier to avoid the special rule.

Verdict: Leave it as-is IF global objective scoring gets capped or rebalanced as suggested in earlier parts. Otherwise, its “fairness” becomes a liability compared to higher-swing alternatives.

➡ Verdict: One of the better designs. Let it breathe.

---

Surprise Attack

Tactical: Debilitating setup and raid.
Scoring: None.
Play Rate: Sometimes.

This one’s fine mechanically. It is, of course, stronger with TF or in an Interdictor/Onager combo (but you don't see too many of those ATM), but overall it's not wrong to force deployment of the enemy flagship AND hand out tons of raid. Raid might not be that powerful, but you get a lot of it for free.

But let’s be honest: in practice, this can lead to three rounds of the first player running away/stalling, followed by each side's attempt to get ahead in score. 

➡ Verdict: Balanced and occasionally excellent. Just… not that fun sometimes.

🚢 Navigation Objectives (Yellow) – Rebellion in the Rim

The yellow objectives in RitR are an interesting mix of tactical rewards, positional play, and scoring. There are some issues, however. Abandoned Mining Facility can lead to runaway scoring. Fleet in Being is a dud. Rift Ambush is tuned for the campaign's 3x3 play area. But with a few tweaks, I think the yellows can be brought into compliance.

---

Abandoned Mining Facility

Tactical: The usual slight advantage in obstacle placement and whale movement.
Scoring: Can be extreme.
Play Rate: High in token-farming builds.

This is a very strong yellow objective. The combination of reliable scoring and some battlefield control makes it quite popular. 

Optional tweaks:

• Introduce a scoring cap (e.g., 80–100 points).

• Optionally, require First Player to move the space whale toward the nearest ship. I often see the second whale just being sent off to one side. But not really a needed fix.

➡ Verdict: Still one of the best yellows. Minor guardrails might keep it from being oppressive.

---

Asteroid Tactics

Tactical: High.
Scoring: None.
Play Rate: Moderate.

This is a clean design. Solid tactical buff for Second Player ships that fly smart, and a significant boost to your squadron game if you can use the board and slugs well. Some fleets benefit more than others, but that's why we have many objectives to choose between. Rewards good obstacle placement and maneuvering.

➡ Verdict: No changes needed. One of the best-designed yellow objectives.

---

Fleet In Being

Tactical: Defensive support, in theory.
Scoring: Slight.
Play Rate: Rare.

This one should be good. It screams "bring me Obi-Wan, Thermal Shields, and a Shield Tech." But in practice, it underperforms. Either the tokens don't get spent, or the tactical benefit doesn't quite materialize.

Two suggested reworks:

1. Scoring Layer:

   • At the end of the game, each player scores 10 points for each of their ships that retained at least one token.

   This rewards disciplined play and creates a mini-game around conservation. Still meh tho.

2. Radical Rework:

   • When spending a redirect token, you may also spend a token targeted by an accuracy icon.

   Yes, it’s spicy. But it could be a powerful mechanic for token-centric fleets, especially if paired with Obi-Wan. But I suppose, as usual, it would actually be Lumi who benefits more. She's a cool commander, but she really does impact design space.

➡ Verdict: Needs help to be viable.

---

Rift Ambush

Tactical: Total obstacle control and slight advantage around the rift.
Scoring: None.
Play Pattern: Can fizzles at 6x3 scale.

This was clearly designed for 3x3 RitR play, where maneuvering is tight and every early shift counts. On a full board, its impact is often reduced—it does offer some board control, but it is not enough to make this a mainstream objective.

Full-scale tweaks:

• Increase Gravity Rift effect range to 1–3 (or even 1–4, though this is pretty huge) to compensate for board size.

• Allow Second Player to reposition TWO enemy ships at the start of the game.

These changes let the objective retain its campaign flavor while having teeth on a standard map.

➡ Verdict: Great concept. Needs full-table tuning to shine.

🛡️ Defense Objectives (Blue) – Rebellion in the Rim

RitR’s blue objectives are a big step up from the chaos of Sensor Net and Navigational Hazards. These cards explore positional pressure, obstacle interaction, and movement across the board in ways that feel dynamic and—mostly—fun. Still, a few need tweaks to bring them up to full-table standard.

---

Doomed Station

Tactical: None unless you count obstacle movement.
Scoring: Strong if not contested.
Play Rate: Underrated.

This is essentially a blue-flavored Contested Outpost, but with moving parts and less obvious counterplay. It’s solid and thematic—but it rarely makes the cut because Infested Fields usually does the same thing better.

Suggested tweak:

• After placing the Gravity Rift, the Second Player places the first obstacle.

It’s a small buff, but one that gives obstacle-heavy lists a slight edge—and encourages a closer look at this often-overlooked card.

➡ Verdict: Playable. Just needs a nudge to rise above the pack.

---

Hyperspace Migration

Tactical: Zero.
Scoring: Toxic.
Fun Factor: Stop. Please stop.

This card is infamous—Strategic token-farming at its worst. The whales just bump into ships while Second Player hoovers up tokens. Yikes.

Salvage attempt (full-scale revision):

• Tokens must be placed in opposite corners of the setup area, not the play area. 

• Purrgills thus must move across, not along the edge of the table.

• Increase Purrgill speed to make the migration feel meaningful and force engagement.

This reimagining restores the "migration" feel and breaks the static loop of corner farming. Will it be perfect? No. But it might be tolerable. On the other hand, where is the second player's advantage now?

➡ Verdict: Currently awful. Needs a thematic overhaul to become fun again, but this might not be it.

---

Infested Fields

Tactical: High, obstacle movement, and slugs.
Scoring: Usually max 15 points to one player.
Play Rate: Very popular.

This is one of the best blue objectives in the game. It's tactical, thematic, and not easily abusable—plus, it punishes bad squad placement and rewards smart play.

➡ Verdict: Leave it alone. It’s great as-is.

---

Volatile Deposits

Tactical: Definitely a thing, although not the main thing for this objective.
Scoring: Net 15 per round for the 2nd player for much of the game.
Play Rate: Decently high.

This objective creates a real “tension zone” and encourages bold plays. Scoring is impactful but not out of control—at 15 points per token, you can gain or lose a significant lead based on area control.

Optional tweaks:

• Add a scoring cap or limit the total number of tokens.

➡ Verdict: One of the best objectives. Consider a cap—but don’t over-nerf.

---

🧭 Closing Thoughts – Rebellion in the Rim

Compared to previous expansions, Rebellion in the Rim stands tall. It’s clear the designers made an effort to fill gaps in the objective pool, creating cards that were fun, flavorful, and competitive. Token-farming is still present, but much more reined in than in the Corellian Conflict era. Strategic abuse is no longer the defining feature of every yellow and blue objective.

That said, some cards (Hyperspace Migration) were clearly built with the 3x3 RitR campaign format in mind, and don’t translate well to full-scale play. Others (Fleet in Being, Marked for Destruction) are strong in theme but weak in execution—yet perhaps salvageable with light reworks.

All in all, RitR brought some of the best-designed objectives to the game—and with a few tweaks, its weakest cards could rise to the same standard.

All in all, RitR brought some of the best-designed objectives to the game—and with a few tweaks, its weakest cards could rise to the same standard.

---

🔜 What’s Next?

That wraps up our tour of the 36 printed objectives in Armada. In Part 4, we’ll zoom out and look at the big picture:

• What’s missing from the current objective pool?

• Which objectives are tournament staples—and which ones should be?

• How could ARC approach objective rebalancing in a post-RitR world?

• Should we design entirely new objectives, fix the ones we have, or leave them the hell alone?

We'll also compile a Top 3 per color, a "Needs a Fix" shortlist, and a few wild ideas that ARC might consider in the future.

Stay tuned.