People keep suggesting the TIE Advanced will, or SHOULD also get a point-cost reduction upgrade similar to the A-Wing. I'm here to tell you why this will not happen.

To make my case I'm going to compare the cheapest models:

Rookie Pilot vs Tempest Squadron Pilot.

Both 21 points, both have extremely similar dials (Advanced being a touch faster).

Rookie can equip astromech (at a cost), vs Advanced has barrell roll and evade (free)

Rookie has torpedo vs advanced has missile

The most significant difference is the flip-flop of 3 attack 2 AGI, vs 2 atk 3 AGI. Since attack is often more difficult to raise, people generally consider attack to be more valuable. This might be different if there wasn't a Stealth Device, and instead there was a 3 point modification that increased your attack value, but dropped once you were hit.

WHY we won't see a point cost reduction:

For FFG to say that the advanced is overcosted, they would basically have to ALSO say that the X-Wing is also overcosted... and I never ever hear people say that X-Wings need to be fixed. This is because of 2 major things:

1) X-Wing have the Astromech Slot, and since new astromechs get released over time, it is constantly breathing fresh ideas into X-Wing builds. I'm willing to accept this as a fair trade for the barrel roll and evade however.

2)X-Wings have a WEALTH of pilots with new ones getting added soon. This is the primary weakness of the Advanced. Imagine if you saw Advanced Pilots that were similar to X-Wing pilots:

Bob Skywalker(28) When attacking you may change one of your EYE results to a CRIT result.

Black leader(26) After spending an evade, you may place an evade token on one ship within range 1-2

Smalls LightDarker(25) Enemy ships MAY NOT target you if they can target ANYONE else.

Pledge Antlers(29) Enemy ships attacking you roll one less die on the attack.

And these are just off-shoots of the current rebel pilots. Imagine some fresh ideas:

Admiral Motti (27) Whenever you gain a target lock, you may assign a focus token to your ship.

Starkiller (28) Gains +1 attack permanently after a friendly ship is destroyed. Stacks up to two times.

In summary: The TIE Advanced is equivalent to the X-Wing, so unless the X-Wing is deemed overcosted, the Advanced isn't going to get a reduction in price. What it does need, is some new pilots and maybe even a new title to bring some fresh ideas into a ship that is already balanced.

Interesting. I certainly won't say no to additional pilots in a future aces/large expansion or whatever that could warrant it's cost.

It just needs some love!

also: dat Smalls LightDarker. OP, obviously not playtested

Here's a thought.

Tie Advanced X2 Title.

Reduces the defense value by 1 and increases the attack value by 1. You now have a X-Wing with evade and barrel roll but no astromech slot.

also: dat Smalls LightDarker. OP, obviously not playtested

Well I was really just trying to do the inverse of Biggs. I think it's a very cool idea though. Might have to cost more - or might have to require the opponent to roll an attack die, and only on a HIT result they are allowed to target you. Any other result they have to target someone else.

I'd rather it be a 4-5 point title and leave the agility value in place. this way it might not be an automatic upgrade... maybe you have to think about it.

I think its less that the advanced is a bad ship, and more than the interceptor is better for the points cost, and that you can field 2 ties instead of 1 advanced for the ez2play tie swarm goodness

The TIE Advanced is equivalent to the X-Wing, so unless the X-Wing is deemed overcosted, the Advanced isn't going to get a reduction in price. What it does need, is some new pilots and maybe even a new title to bring some fresh ideas into a ship that is already balanced.

The TIE Advanced is not balanced, or you'd see it played competitively far more often. And there's no problem with the existing pilot abilities on the Advanced, both of which are excellent. The problem with the TIE Advanced is that reducing the X-wing's attack from 3 to 2 is not equivalent to increasing its Agility from 2 to 3. In fact, I'm fairly sure that assumption is what got FFG into trouble in the first place.

Basically, the problem is that the game's win condition depends almost entirely upon Attack. Increasing a ship's Agility (in combination with hull and shields) merely prolongs games. In comparison with the X-wing, the TIE Advanced typically lives roughly half again as many rounds, but does roughly half the damage on each round. That's not a good equation: over its lifespan, the TIE Advanced does about 1.5 * 0.5 = 0.75 of the X-wing's total damage. That is, the TIE Advanced contributes less to the game's win condition than the X-wing, even after considering its longer lifespan. To me, that pretty clearly means the Advanced should be correspondingly less expensive than the X-wing.

Now those are very, very rough estimates, and as such that "equation" is more illustrative than predictive. But the Advanced really does have a costing problem, and it's rooted in the inequivalence of Attack and Agility.

You should dual someone. 21 point advanced vs 21 point x-wing. The Advanced will win every time.

You should dual someone. 21 point advanced vs 21 point x-wing. The Advanced will win every time.

I've done this, and you're correct. The problem comes in a 100 point squad. Vader has a clear use, but there are no other pilots are upgrades, currently, that make the Advance shine as it could. The OP had some good ideas and really illustrated the point of how the Advanced COULD be the Empire's X-wing.

I don't think the issue is cost as much it is play style. The Advanced is a defensive ship, like the A-wing, and they are at a disadvantage in a timed tournament situation. They simply take longer to win with, and in a tournament you just don't have the time. One on one, an Advanced can beat an X-wing if flown properly, but you have to play to its strengths, which is not attack power.

Dueling is not what this game is about. In dueling I can take an Xwing with a single tie fighter if I manuever well. The advanced is not as good on a team as an Xwing. It doesn't have the offensive punch needed to help a team for the cost pr the manueverability(Vader aside) to stay out of Arc's like an interceptor can meaning it cannot handle focused fire much better than an Xwing.

Sure, the stat line looks like an Xwing. But 3 attack is roughly twice as good as 2. while 3 evade is roughly 1/8th less effective than 3 attack.

So this is just another "the advanced isn't broken, don't try to fix it thread"? Seriously? We' ve covered this.

Many have felt the advance was AT LEAST 2 pts over osted and the Awing maybe 1. I really doubt FFG won't have noticed they corrected one ship but not the worst ship in the game. I'm seeing multiple "prototype" titles, maybe even unique titles for the advanced that decrease cost/add features: x2-x7

The TIE Advanced is equivalent to the X-Wing, so unless the X-Wing is deemed overcosted, the Advanced isn't going to get a reduction in price. What it does need, is some new pilots and maybe even a new title to bring some fresh ideas into a ship that is already balanced.

The TIE Advanced is not balanced, or you'd see it played competitively far more often. And there's no problem with the existing pilot abilities on the Advanced, both of which are excellent. The problem with the TIE Advanced is that reducing the X-wing's attack from 3 to 2 is not equivalent to increasing its Agility from 2 to 3. In fact, I'm fairly sure that assumption is what got FFG into trouble in the first place.Basically, the problem is that the game's win condition depends almost entirely upon Attack. Increasing a ship's Agility (in combination with hull and shields) merely prolongs games. In comparison with the X-wing, the TIE Advanced typically lives roughly half again as many rounds, but does roughly half the damage on each round. That's not a good equation: over its lifespan, the TIE Advanced does about 1.5 * 0.5 = 0.75 of the X-wing's total damage. That is, the TIE Advanced contributes less to the game's win condition than the X-wing, even after considering its longer lifespan. To me, that pretty clearly means the Advanced should be correspondingly less expensive than the X-wing.Now those are very, very rough estimates, and as such that "equation" is more illustrative than predictive. But the Advanced really does have a costing problem, and it's rooted in the inequivalence of Attack and Agility.

Prolonging the game due to high agility is a valid way to win the game. You'll be surprised how frustrated your opponent will get with Vader/ elusiveness / stealth and an evade every turn . Don't worry about damage every turn so much . Wait for your for the rebel scum to make the mistake, then barrel roll in and take advantage of it.

The most significant difference is the flip-flop of 3 attack 2 AGI, vs 2 atk 3 AGI. Since attack is often more difficult to raise, people generally consider attack to be more valuable.

No, this is not why people consider attack more valuable than agility. People consider attack more valuable than agility because there are more hits and crits on an attack die than there are agilities on an agility die. An attack die is, statistically, more effective at doing its job than an agility die is at doing its job.

The TIE Advanced is equivalent to the X-Wing, so unless the X-Wing is deemed overcosted, the Advanced isn't going to get a reduction in price. What it does need, is some new pilots and maybe even a new title to bring some fresh ideas into a ship that is already balanced.

The TIE Advanced is not balanced, or you'd see it played competitively far more often. And there's no problem with the existing pilot abilities on the Advanced, both of which are excellent. The problem with the TIE Advanced is that reducing the X-wing's attack from 3 to 2 is not equivalent to increasing its Agility from 2 to 3. In fact, I'm fairly sure that assumption is what got FFG into trouble in the first place.Basically, the problem is that the game's win condition depends almost entirely upon Attack. Increasing a ship's Agility (in combination with hull and shields) merely prolongs games. In comparison with the X-wing, the TIE Advanced typically lives roughly half again as many rounds, but does roughly half the damage on each round. That's not a good equation: over its lifespan, the TIE Advanced does about 1.5 * 0.5 = 0.75 of the X-wing's total damage. That is, the TIE Advanced contributes less to the game's win condition than the X-wing, even after considering its longer lifespan. To me, that pretty clearly means the Advanced should be correspondingly less expensive than the X-wing.Now those are very, very rough estimates, and as such that "equation" is more illustrative than predictive. But the Advanced really does have a costing problem, and it's rooted in the inequivalence of Attack and Agility.

Prolonging the game due to high agility is a valid way to win the game. You'll be surprised how frustrated your opponent will get with Vader/ elusiveness / stealth and an evade every turn . Don't worry about damage every turn so much . Wait for your for the rebel scum to make the mistake, then barrel roll in and take advantage of it.

2. This is simply not an option in times games, and can be a negative play experience for people if this is a standard tactic or result.

You should dual someone. 21 point advanced vs 21 point x-wing. The Advanced will win every time.

I'm not speaking from inexperience with the Advanced. I own two, my first tournament list used both, I often fly Vader in a support/finisher role, and most importantly, I've attempted a lot of different competitive lists using the TIE Advanced. They all fail, and the reason they fail is that the TIE Advanced costs too much for what it contributes to a list's offense.

And as others have noted, a duel does not reflect a match, let alone a four- or six- or ten-round tournament.

Prolonging the game due to high agility is a valid way to win the game. You'll be surprised how frustrated your opponent will get with Vader/ elusiveness / stealth and an evade every turn . Don't worry about damage every turn so much . Wait for your for the rebel scum to make the mistake, then barrel roll in and take advantage of it.

This is just another way of saying that I should try dueling someone with a TIE Advanced, and it also conflates Vader--who is fine, due to a pilot ability that would be flat-out broken on almost any other ship in the game--with the TIE Advanced overall.

So this is just another "the advanced isn't broken, don't try to fix it thread"? Seriously? We' ve covered this.

Yeah, this is the only X-wing forum I participate in where people periodically bring up new threads to try to defend the Advanced.

I guess the only thing left to do is wait and see.

I don't think the issue is cost as much it is play style. The Advanced is a defensive ship, like the A-wing, and they are at a disadvantage in a timed tournament situation. They simply take longer to win with, and in a tournament you just don't have the time. One on one, an Advanced can beat an X-wing if flown properly, but you have to play to its strengths, which is not attack power.

And this is the issue I have brought up. The Advanced needs to bring this defensive attribute to the team. The way I see it, the Advanced should have pilots and mods that help out the team. I'm going to play test my Evade factory idea. I also like the idea of a Support Fire upgrade. Something like:

At the start of the combat phase choose a ship at Range 1-2 and add (standard hit) to their next attack. You may not attack this round.

It's not valid to compare the TIE Advanced to an X-wing in the first place. There's this misguided assumption that the Advanced is the Imperial's X-wing. It's not. A pair of TIE/lns are the Imperial's X-wing. For reference, see the core set.

Perhaps the biggest cost factor here is munitions. The TIE Advanced was the first missile platform correct?

Missile can certainly win over another ship with relatively low agility. If you use the ordinance then your attack dice don't matter. It could have zero attack dice if it had a discount on missiles. I'd actually love to see that as an option. perhaps a title that reduces the cost of an equipped missile by 1. Might not be too significant of a change but it would be a good starting point.

It's not valid to compare the TIE Advanced to an X-wing in the first place. There's this misguided assumption that the Advanced is the Imperial's X-wing. It's not. A pair of TIE/lns are the Imperial's X-wing. For reference, see the core set.

Agree to disagree.

Just because 2 TIE's come in the core set does NOT mean they are THE X-Wing. They are 2 TIEs. They are meant to be balanced against an X-Wing, but just because you can balance 2 ships against one, doesn't mean they are the X-Wing.

Comparing the TIE Advanced to the X-Wing is valid because the Nearly identical dials, nearly identical stats, and identical point cost. Their differences are few. The most significant different is the flip flopping of attack and agility. But that doesn't mean that the comparison isn't valid. it most certainly IS valid.

I agree the cost of the advanced is fine that is because like the a wing you pay for a missle slot which isn't particularly useful. However the roll of the advanced is a precision missle carrier. Marek stele is particularly known for this and his ability to use the new proton rockets efficiently.

I don't believe the advanced should cost less however it does need to be improved for its roll.

I recommend

Modification- advanced only- "Advanced prototype"

Increase range of missiles by 1- cost free (you lose modification slot)

Title- advanced only - "Tie advanced x2"

Adds system upgrade slot to advanced- cost free (you still need to pay for the upgrade)

Also I'd like to see them add the tie avenger model

3/3/3/2 or 3/3/2/3 focus, barrel roll, evade

Cost 2-3 points more then a comparable tie interceptor

Trades boost and manueverabilty of interceptor for 2 shields.

Adds 1 primary atk instead of target lock, missle slot, and system upgrade slot of advanced/advancedx2

Personally id like to see vadar with sensor jammer and stealth device.

Hi Crabbok,

The math does not support your hypothesis at all. There is a 23 page thread here dedicated to it:

http://community.fantasyflightgames.com/index.php?/topic/94711-fixing-the-tie-advanced/

That discussion includes the math with using evade as an action.

See also:

http://community.fantasyflightgames.com/index.php?/topic/100360-using-lanchesters-square-law-to-predict-ships-jousting-values-and-fair-point-values-work-in-progress/

The TIE Advanced easily has the worst jousting efficiency of any non-support (HWK) small ship in the game.

Rakky has also compiled the results of the Store Championships. There have been only TWO TIE Advanced in about 70 winners, both Vader.

Personally I think that for it's cost the Tie Advanced should have missiles a good bit cheaper.

For example; Cluster missiles were 'standard issue' (IIRC) for the Tie Advanced.

How would you feel that the cost was of the ship with this specific missile for 1 or 2 points (as opposed to 4?)

(other non-standard missiles with current costs)

Since attack is often more difficult to raise, people generally consider attack to be more valuable.

You're right that people consider attack dice to be more valuable, but your logic is flawed. Attack is more valuable than agility for two reasons, neither of which is the one you mention:

1. All else being equal, a single attack die is more likely to achieve a hit result than a defense die is to achieve an evade result.
2. The way damage is calculated, a hit result is always useful - it is always being used to either cancel an evade or deal damage to an opponent. On the other hand, an evade result is only useful if it cancels a hit result.

​ If you think about this, you will realize that it is better for the attacker who rolls 3 attack vs 3 defense than it is for the attacker who rolls 2 attack vs 2 defense. This is why I would rather fly an X-Wing than a TIE Advanced.

The major flaw in the TIE/Ad = X-Wing theory is that the two do not in fact have similar stats. In point of fact, they are nearly opposites. One of these ships is difficult to kill, but not particularly damaging. The other is damaging, but easier to kill. The two ships are opposites, not equivalents.

Take this analogy. Two modern military vehicles. One, an uparmored Humvee with two crew armed with pistols. The other, an unarmored Humvee with a .50 cal mounted on top. If you are an enemy, which of those two Humvee is more dangerous?

When you look across the table at your opponent's squadron, you decide which of those ships are the greatest threat and go after them first. The ones that do the most damage are the primary targets, and if there is more than one damaging ship you go after the EASIEST to drop. Unfortunately, the TIE/Ad combines low damage with high survivability, making it by far the least attractive target. Since Agility only matters when you are being shot at, the TIE/Ad will not have the opportunity to contribute its toughness to the squadron as a whole until it is the last ship standing. By that point, the cumulative effect of its poor contributions will leave the opponent at a points advantage, so the TIE/Ad is now out matched. An X-Wing on the other hand, can contribute its high damage immediately, and for the entire time it is on the table. As the game plays out, the X-Wing is able to prevent the opponent gaining a points advantage so by the time it is the last ship standing it is facing a roughly equivalent opponent. If there were some way for the TIE/Ad to contribute its defensive abilities to the entire squadron (like Biggs, for example) then it would be worth the points. As it is, it costs too much in a squadron based game.

One on one the TIE/Ad does well because its defensive abilities are in play for the entire duration of the game, not just at the end when it is outnumbered 2-1. Four on Four, the TIE/Ad does not do well because only one of those four is contributing its full abilities at any given point in the game. The bigger the game gets, the more pronounced this issue will become.