If the TIE Advanced is supposed to be the "Imperial" X-Wing I could see the "Avenger" as simply switching the 2 and 3 from Attack and Hull. Give it a 3/3/2/2 stat line and you've got all the same numbers the X-Wing has and get a ship that hits harder than an A-Wing but takes hits better than an Interceptor even if it isn't quite as maneuverable on the dial.

Well, the TIE Avenger is by no means the Imperial X-wing. It is the ultimate dedicated space superiority fighter, and ate X-wings for breakfast. It saw far less use, but when used, it was frequently an escort for Assault Gunboats.

Why 27? it should be 25/26 to start

(because shields costs 1 more than hull [E-wing have 2 hulls and 3 shields, then it costs 1 point more than 3 hulls and 2 shield) and Avenger only have missile slot upgrade, E-wing have missile, droid and systems)

I prefer it to have its own mold/model and different cards entirely, just to skip Vader and avoid abuse. The main reason, I like the Avenger model way better than the Advanced.

The Ewing will have a far better dial than the advanced. I would cost this upgrade at 3. 24 points for a 3 3 3 2 ships seems fair. Even then, compared to a PS 1 Interceptor it seems overcosted.

You are right. Making it with the original Advanced dial and start at 27 just nerf (and even worse) it even more, a 6 point increase for only 1 increase in attack and nothing else.

I was thinking of it having an interceptor dial 3/3/3/2 for 25. No boost.

If the TIE Advanced is supposed to be the "Imperial" X-Wing I could see the "Avenger" as simply switching the 2 and 3 from Attack and Hull. Give it a 3/3/2/2 stat line and you've got all the same numbers the X-Wing has and get a ship that hits harder than an A-Wing but takes hits better than an Interceptor even if it isn't quite as maneuverable on the dial.

Well, the TIE Avenger is by no means the Imperial X-wing. It is the ultimate dedicated space superiority fighter, and ate X-wings for breakfast. It saw far less use, but when used, it was frequently an escort for Assault Gunboats.

If we're talking about the video game I'll agree that the X-Wing and Avenger were two very different beast. In this game I've seen enough talk that the Advanced and X-Wing are supposed to be some kind of "mirror" which is why they cost the same and each have 2/3/3/2 in their stat lines. If the Advanced was allowed to get/keep the 3 attack and instead saw defense shift from hull (or even shield) to agility I believe it would have seen a lot more play and you wouldn't see threads like this.

If the TIE Advanced is supposed to be the "Imperial" X-Wing I could see the "Avenger" as simply switching the 2 and 3 from Attack and Hull. Give it a 3/3/2/2 stat line and you've got all the same numbers the X-Wing has and get a ship that hits harder than an A-Wing but takes hits better than an Interceptor even if it isn't quite as maneuverable on the dial.

Well, the TIE Avenger is by no means the Imperial X-wing. It is the ultimate dedicated space superiority fighter, and ate X-wings for breakfast. It saw far less use, but when used, it was frequently an escort for Assault Gunboats.

If we're talking about the video game I'll agree that the X-Wing and Avenger were two very different beast. In this game I've seen enough talk that the Advanced and X-Wing are supposed to be some kind of "mirror" which is why they cost the same and each have 2/3/3/2 in their stat lines. If the Advanced was allowed to get/keep the 3 attack and instead saw defense shift from hull (or even shield) to agility I believe it would have seen a lot more play and you wouldn't see threads like this.

That is technically one option, but I seriously doubt that we will ever see it. I would much rather see a free FCS on TIE Advanced x1 than swap stat values around. That's a radically drastic change, and also reduces the overall variety in the game. Ships can be of equivalent power and not be mirrors of each other. Zerglings / Zealots / Marines are a good example.

As I said, I think the game balance is fine as it is. This is not a "how to fix the advanced" thread. The advanced is fine as it is.

What I suggested was just an easy, fluffy casual variant since none of us would get an Avenger any time soon (even if it's in Wave5, we're looking at 6+ months so that's that). So no need for heated discussions whether we should house-rule anything or not.

Major's suggestions for a 3/3/3/8 Defender and a 3/3/3/4 Avenger has entertained me quite a bit though. If a 3/3/3/3 costs 30 can you imageine how much a small base 3/3/3/8 ship would cost? I'd imagine something over 50 points as otherwise two of these in a 100 point game would be unstoppable. If it was anything under 50 basically you'd have to deal 11 points of damage to a DEF 3 ship, TWICE!! That's probably 8-9 attacks with 3+ attack dice per target! (Major can probably tell us the correct numbers there)

Even if these numbers are based off of the computer games, that doesn't mean stats translate between game systems in such a linear fashion. For example, two laser cannons equal 2 red dice but four of them only equal 3 dice.

On another note, my suggestion also excludes Vader as the X1 is HIS ship and I don't care much for seeing him fly and Avenger.

I believe we already have a Shielded Tie-Interceptor with lots of upgrade options, and it is called the E-wing.

1. The TIE Advanced x1 stats and capabilities follow the background material.
2. The TIE Defender stats and capabilities do not follow the background material.
3. The TIE Avenger capabilities (dial better than TIE Interceptor, boost action, 3/3/3/4 stats) are not on the TIE Advanced x1.
4. The TIE Avenger capabilities cannot all be added by a simple TIE Advanced x1 only modification card, even if this card added 1 attack, 2 shields, and the Boost action. You need to drastically change the dial to be accurate.
5. The TIE Avenger capabilities are clearly in a whole other league above the TIE Advanced x1, and the physical model is also drastically different. I am strongly of the opinion that the TIE Avenger is worth its own release if they choose to implement it.
6. The TIE Advanced x1 being overcosted is independent of all of this, and can be fixed by adding a free FCS, and reducing the cost of the Tempest, Storm, and Maarek pilots by 1 point.
7. If you attempt to "fix" the x1 by turning it into the Avenger, then it does nothing for the unmodified x1, which will still remain overcosted. You're also severely breaking cannon, as Vader was not flying an Avenger. See point #1

1. Agreed.

2. Also agreed.

3. The Defender canonwise is better than the Avenger, and has a different dial to the Interceptor rather than a better one.

4. Point 2 states that FFG don't care for the TIE fighter game's linear ship scaling.

5. The physical model's different, but FFG isn't adverse to releasing ships with changes to the model (the Ace repaints).

6. Relevant how? Also explain the FCS relevant to canon, which is the basis for most of your argument here.

7. By that logic Charadaan refit does nothing for the A-wing. As for breaking canon, Maarek in the x1? Corran Horn as an E-wing pilot? It's certainly possible for Vader to fly an Avenger.

FFG doesn't follow TIE fighter's concept of "Here's a god fighter that wipes the floor with all the others. If the Alliance gets it we're all doomed. Oh, and here's another god fighter that wipes the floor with the first one." Every single source that isn't TIE fighter tones the Defender down miles. Unless you want the Avenger to be better than the Defender, there's no design space for it by the way FFG does things. Yes, canonwise the Avenger's more maneuverable than the x1, but canonwise the Defender can turn faster than the interceptor with more ease.

As for a 3 damage 5HP ship with an interceptor dial, that's Royal Guard TIE with Shield and Hull upgrades.

Major's suggestions for a 3/3/3/8 Defender and a 3/3/3/4 Avenger has entertained me quite a bit though. If a 3/3/3/3 costs 30 can you imageine how much a small base 3/3/3/8 ship would cost?

The biggest missed opportunity I see with the Defender is that FFG could have introduced a new game dynamic in the form of Beam Weapons. Secondly, the dial is weird. It's not accurate to the background material, so we have a new kind of craft that looks like the TIE Defender but acts and flies much differently.

I wouldn't release a 3/3/3/8 stat line Defender. 3/3/3/4 is perfect for this game, and is in line with what the stats were after it got nerfed. But we can entertain the thought later for House Rules.

What 3/3/3/4 or 3/3/3/8 is be worth is an interesting question. The revealed TIE Defender at 3/3/3/3 has a stat line jousting value of around:

A 3/3/3/4 stat line would have a jousting value of around:

12*(1.74*(4*1.25 + 3)/3)^0.52 = 26.7.

If we turn that into an Avenger with an Interceptor dial + boost, you are looking at around 29-31 points for PS1.

If we then turn it into a TIE Defender by adding a Beam Weapon and a Cannon Slot (and possibly a System Upgrade), you're looking at a couple more points for that extra capability. Call it 32 points at PS1, or better yet 33 points at PS2.

Finally, if we invented House Rules for the original TIE Defender at 3/3/3/8, it would have a jousting value of about:

12*(1.74*(8*1.25 + 3)/3)^0.55 = 36.5

I increased the exponent from 0.52 to 0.55 since its such an expensive ship and to be conservative (see Lanchester's thread for more details). So adding in some cost for all of the bells and whistles, you are looking at around 40-42 for PS1. It really depends what you make the dial. If you wanted to be "accurate" to the original version, that was stupidly powerful, you could give it an Interceptor dial with 2 white K-turns, green on all 2's and 3's. Figure that beast will end up costing somewhere in the high 40's at PS3. I would make the PS3 and PS5 for Defender Pilots, since they were the best of the best. None of this PS1 nonsense. It's too early to tell exactly how much of an effect the white K-turn will have, let alone if it were put on a ship that didn't have red on its turn 1 and turn 2. It would be interesting to playtest though, that's for sure.

42 for almost Falcon health with three agility?

If the TIE Advanced is supposed to be the "Imperial" X-Wing I could see the "Avenger" as simply switching the 2 and 3 from Attack and Hull. Give it a 3/3/2/2 stat line and you've got all the same numbers the X-Wing has and get a ship that hits harder than an A-Wing but takes hits better than an Interceptor even if it isn't quite as maneuverable on the dial.

Well, the TIE Avenger is by no means the Imperial X-wing. It is the ultimate dedicated space superiority fighter, and ate X-wings for breakfast. It saw far less use, but when used, it was frequently an escort for Assault Gunboats.

If we're talking about the video game I'll agree that the X-Wing and Avenger were two very different beast. In this game I've seen enough talk that the Advanced and X-Wing are supposed to be some kind of "mirror" which is why they cost the same and each have 2/3/3/2 in their stat lines. If the Advanced was allowed to get/keep the 3 attack and instead saw defense shift from hull (or even shield) to agility I believe it would have seen a lot more play and you wouldn't see threads like this.

That is technically one option, but I seriously doubt that we will ever see it. I would much rather see a free FCS on TIE Advanced x1 than swap stat values around. That's a radically drastic change, and also reduces the overall variety in the game. Ships can be of equivalent power and not be mirrors of each other. Zerglings / Zealots / Marines are a good example.

I like the idea, a free modification (0 cost) of Systems Upgrade slot for Tie Advanced x1

As of right now only the Lambda, B-wing and E-wing have this upgrade slot, the Tie Advanced x1 getting it would make it interesting.

If the TIE Advanced is supposed to be the "Imperial" X-Wing I could see the "Avenger" as simply switching the 2 and 3 from Attack and Hull. Give it a 3/3/2/2 stat line and you've got all the same numbers the X-Wing has and get a ship that hits harder than an A-Wing but takes hits better than an Interceptor even if it isn't quite as maneuverable on the dial.

Well, the TIE Avenger is by no means the Imperial X-wing. It is the ultimate dedicated space superiority fighter, and ate X-wings for breakfast. It saw far less use, but when used, it was frequently an escort for Assault Gunboats.

If we're talking about the video game I'll agree that the X-Wing and Avenger were two very different beast. In this game I've seen enough talk that the Advanced and X-Wing are supposed to be some kind of "mirror" which is why they cost the same and each have 2/3/3/2 in their stat lines. If the Advanced was allowed to get/keep the 3 attack and instead saw defense shift from hull (or even shield) to agility I believe it would have seen a lot more play and you wouldn't see threads like this.

That is technically one option, but I seriously doubt that we will ever see it. I would much rather see a free FCS on TIE Advanced x1 than swap stat values around. That's a radically drastic change, and also reduces the overall variety in the game. Ships can be of equivalent power and not be mirrors of each other. Zerglings / Zealots / Marines are a good example.

I like the idea, a free modification (0 cost) of Systems Upgrade slot for Tie Advanced x1

As of right now only the Lambda, B-wing and E-wing have this upgrade slot, the Tie Advanced x1 getting it would make it interesting.

Personally putting a systems upgrade on the Advanced doesn't make a lot of sense. I've never liked the FCS addition either. The best fix will be a straight up point reduction.

I see mention made of the A-Wing's future refit. If one wants to make something to "improve" the Advanced yet leave Vader flying the ship he has that is easy enough to do; just restrict it to ships with PS 8 and lower.

yet another 'how to fix the Tie Advanced' ....

The Tie Advanced and the Tie Avenger are 2 different ships.

Recognize the 4 interceptorish wings with laser cannons?

Well if they ain't going to make the Tie-Avenger for the game WHY NOT make it a title Card for the Tie-Advanced making it a more competitive ship with the stats lffo proposed. Tie-Advanced is the prototype which leads to the creation of the Tie-Avenger.

where the f-f-f-f **** do u even know what they are doing and what not ??

i want the **** avanger as one unique model besides the dial for the advanced is jsut rubbish compare to the other tie variants. 4 green moves 2 of em are 1 banks but no one straight ? hmm yeah well i love the advanced and like to fly it but non or less we need the x 2 avanger where meerek fired proton rockets at point blank range ( better dial template )

1. The TIE Advanced x1 stats and capabilities follow the background material.
2. The TIE Defender stats and capabilities do not follow the background material.
3. The TIE Avenger capabilities (dial better than TIE Interceptor, boost action, 3/3/3/4 stats) are not on the TIE Advanced x1.
4. The TIE Avenger capabilities cannot all be added by a simple TIE Advanced x1 only modification card, even if this card added 1 attack, 2 shields, and the Boost action. You need to drastically change the dial to be accurate.
5. The TIE Avenger capabilities are clearly in a whole other league above the TIE Advanced x1, and the physical model is also drastically different. I am strongly of the opinion that the TIE Avenger is worth its own release if they choose to implement it.
6. The TIE Advanced x1 being overcosted is independent of all of this, and can be fixed by adding a free FCS, and reducing the cost of the Tempest, Storm, and Maarek pilots by 1 point.
7. If you attempt to "fix" the x1 by turning it into the Avenger, then it does nothing for the unmodified x1, which will still remain overcosted. You're also severely breaking cannon, as Vader was not flying an Avenger. See point #1

1. Agreed.

2. Also agreed.

3. The Defender canonwise is better than the Avenger, and has a different dial to the Interceptor rather than a better one.

4. Point 2 states that FFG don't care for the TIE fighter game's linear ship scaling.

5. The physical model's different, but FFG isn't adverse to releasing ships with changes to the model (the Ace repaints).

6. Relevant how? Also explain the FCS relevant to canon, which is the basis for most of your argument here.

7. By that logic Charadaan refit does nothing for the A-wing. As for breaking canon, Maarek in the x1? Corran Horn as an E-wing pilot? It's certainly possible for Vader to fly an Avenger.

FFG doesn't follow TIE fighter's concept of "Here's a god fighter that wipes the floor with all the others. If the Alliance gets it we're all doomed. Oh, and here's another god fighter that wipes the floor with the first one." Every single source that isn't TIE fighter tones the Defender down miles. Unless you want the Avenger to be better than the Defender, there's no design space for it by the way FFG does things. Yes, canonwise the Avenger's more maneuverable than the x1, but canonwise the Defender can turn faster than the interceptor with more ease.

As for a 3 damage 5HP ship with an interceptor dial, that's Royal Guard TIE with Shield and Hull upgrades.

3. That depends on which version of the TIE Defender you are referring to: the original version, or the nerfed version. There was only one "version" of the TIE Avenger, and it was significantly more maneuverable than the TIE Interceptor, and significantly faster as well. The original TIE Defender was slightly faster and more maneuverable than the TIE Avenger. The nerfed TIE Defender was actually less maneuverable than the TIE Avenger; it was merely on par with the TIE Interceptor as you pointed out here.

4. Why would you conclude that? The Firespray and named YT-1300 pilots are both more expensive and yet win a significant number of Store Championships. It might be more accurate to speculate that all of the shielded 3 agility ships have been overpriced.

5. Actually, the Imperial aces is an example of where they could have made a physically different model for the Royal Guard TIE (winglets), but choose to merely do a repaint. The prototype A-wing and Dagger B-wing are the same physical ships as their PS3/PS2 brethren, so they obviously only get a repaint.

6. Adding a free FCS is working within the confines of the game mechanics to make the X-wings and TIE Advanced approximately equivalent in power, without resorting to changing the stat line. Incidentally it makes them a great platform for Cluster Missiles, which is something that they were known for.

7. I think your argument is one of extreme semantics here. I consider A-wing + refit as the "new normal" for the A-wing. It's just a point reduction.and doesn't change the ship, aside from consuming the Missile slot. Adding a free FCS wouldn't drastically change the ship, it would simply establish the "new normal" at the expense of the modification slot consumed.

3. That depends on which version of the TIE Defender you are referring to: the original version, or the nerfed version. There was only one "version" of the TIE Avenger, and it was significantly more maneuverable than the TIE Interceptor, and significantly faster as well. The original TIE Defender was slightly faster and more maneuverable than the TIE Avenger. The nerfed TIE Defender was actually less maneuverable than the TIE Avenger; it was merely on par with the TIE Interceptor as you pointed out here.

There aren't two varieties of TIE defender, the TIE fighter game just goes ridiculously overboard for the benefit of its story. Everywhere else the Defender is depicted it's more in line with FFG's depiction: it's a very capable ship but no Sun Crusher. The only reason the Avenger never received the same treatment is because nothing other than TIE fighter has Avengers in, they're remarkably unpopular compared to the Defender. Even the TIE phantom's been in more than the Avenger.

4. Why would you conclude that? The Firespray and named YT-1300 pilots are both more expensive and yet win a significant number of Store Championships. It might be more accurate to speculate that all of the shielded 3 agility ships have been overpriced.

By linear ship scaling I mean TIE fighter < TIE interceptor < TIE avenger < TIE defender in all respects. FFG prefers each ship to have its own strengths and weaknesses.

5. Actually, the Imperial aces is an example of where they could have made a physically different model for the Royal Guard TIE (winglets), but choose to merely do a repaint. The prototype A-wing and Dagger B-wing are the same physical ships as their PS3/PS2 brethren, so they obviously only get a repaint.

They would have to change the machines to change only one of the interceptors in the box. That, and it's possible they simply didn't like the winglets too.

6. Adding a free FCS is working within the confines of the game mechanics to make the X-wings and TIE Advanced approximately equivalent in power, without resorting to changing the stat line. Incidentally it makes them a great platform for Cluster Missiles, which is something that they were known for.

A fair few things have them have that but even more have them just with the TIE fighter cockpit cannons. It's hardly a defining trait. How does it make sense fluffwise for an Advanced to have built-in FCS?

42 for almost Falcon health with three agility?

Something in that neighborhood at PS1. At PS5 with a named pilot ability would bring it up from 42 to 47 points, cmopared to 42 points for Chewie. The hyper-maneuverable version would cost even more, you would be looking at low/mid 50's for a single PS5 ship. These obviously aren't exact numbers, they are just meant as a starting point if someone was actually serious about playtesting something.

Remember that the Falcon's 360 degree firing arc is a big deal , and the crew slots make for arguably much better upgrade slots. If you look at the stat line jousting value of the Falcon it actually doesn't look very good, but the ship in reality is very competitive, largely because of that firing arc.

3. That depends on which version of the TIE Defender you are referring to: the original version, or the nerfed version. There was only one "version" of the TIE Avenger, and it was significantly more maneuverable than the TIE Interceptor, and significantly faster as well. The original TIE Defender was slightly faster and more maneuverable than the TIE Avenger. The nerfed TIE Defender was actually less maneuverable than the TIE Avenger; it was merely on par with the TIE Interceptor as you pointed out here.

There aren't two varieties of TIE defender, the TIE fighter game just goes ridiculously overboard for the benefit of its story. Everywhere else the Defender is depicted it's more in line with FFG's depiction: it's a very capable ship but no Sun Crusher. The only reason the Avenger never received the same treatment is because nothing other than TIE fighter has Avengers in, they're remarkably unpopular compared to the Defender. Even the TIE phantom's been in more than the Avenger.

The original version of the TIE Defender in the TIE Fighter PC game had 200 SBD (shields), 175 DPF (maneuverability), and 155 MGLT (speed). It was later toned down in X-wing Alliance to 100 SBD, 110 DPF, and 144 MGLT.

So which set of stats is right? As Obi Wan said, that all depends on your point of view. I am certainly not advocating that the OP super costly version should ever have been made into the retail game. I could see custom house rules for scenarios revolving around the original Super Defender though.

This ship may equip a Fire Control System for free. This card costs 0 for Darth Vader, and -1 for all other pilots.

Got a better idea? Post it!

Experimental Upgrades

TIE Advanced only. Modification.

Cost: -1/0*

This ship may equip a Fire Control System for free. This card costs 0 for Darth Vader, and -1 for all other pilots.

Got a better idea? Post it!

Experimental Upgrades

TIE Advanced only. Modification.

Cost: -1/0*

This ship may equip a Fire Control System for free. This modification has a cost of -1 for all pilots with a pilot skill of 7 or less. *For pilots with a pilot skill above 7 this modification has a cost of 0.

Aaaand there we are back in "How to fix the Advanced" mode again...

Aaaand there we are back in "How to fix the Advanced" mode again...

We never actually leave.

Along with: Ordinance is too expensive, Rebels are OP, and TIE Swarms are broken.