I like the game design decisions made on the Defender. It doesn't make any sense as portrayed in the lore. Bigger! Faster! Tougher! More Maneuverable! More Guns! It doesn't make any trade-offs, whereas almost everything else does.

The trade-offs are clear: cost, underproduced.

The point mechanics help balance the game, yes... But the stat constraints matter as well. For example, consider a 4 attack 4 defense version of the defender with access to ptl. How many points would that be worth... Give it a great dial too.... Say you can run 1 and some this.. Is it too weak, but two too strong? Points can't rally compensate there, the stats probably need to come down.

Say you give the interceptor dial to the current defender... Why do I take an interceptor anymore? And why does it feel like I just added 3 shields (12 points) to an alpha squad 18 points... Point wise and stat wise we are in the right place, and our mini looks different, but that interceptor dial with boost on a defender makes it feel like, uh, an interceptor? I can already take a hull + shield upgrade on an interceptor for 30 points, and have a near enough ship to the defender you want.... I suppose you could build that and just use a defender model.

I like that they've made the defender play different. It seems balanced so far, and it's fun (for me). I agree, the tight turns at a bit punitive, combined with only straight greens. If only it had a slot for an r2 droid! (Though, that'd be broken, no red at all.....) I don't know if you've tried vessery w outmaneuver and a shuttle w st321 or a tie bomber, but there is a ship that needs no actions, and flies perfectly well with stress....

I like the game design decisions made on the Defender. It doesn't make any sense as portrayed in the lore. Bigger! Faster! Tougher! More Maneuverable! More Guns! It doesn't make any trade-offs, whereas almost everything else does.

The trade-offs are clear: cost, underproduced.

I am an engineer, so I'm not just making this up when I say that the Defender as represented in the video games is just silly. Even for Star Wars.

I'm unsure if this is true or not, but I feel like the Defender must have been overlooked in playtesting. My guess is this was the result of needing to over-playtest the new "cloaking" mechanic on the Phantom.

But this is sillier. As Ravncat mentioned, the Defender is a truly unique ship that plays unlike anything else in the game. It appears to be pretty well balanced (though we will need to see how it fits into the stabilized meta in a few weeks), and it provides a fun play experience. There is no way you can arrive at that kind of design without careful testing.

I like the game design decisions made on the Defender. It doesn't make any sense as portrayed in the lore. Bigger! Faster! Tougher! More Maneuverable! More Guns! It doesn't make any trade-offs, whereas almost everything else does.

The trade-offs are clear: cost, underproduced.

I am an engineer, so I'm not just making this up when I say that the Defender as represented in the video games is just silly. Even for Star Wars.

You don't say? So how many starfighters have you worked on in your engineering career?

The point mechanics help balance the game, yes... But the stat constraints matter as well. For example, consider a 4 attack 4 defense version of the defender with access to ptl. How many points would that be worth... Give it a great dial too.... Say you can run 1 and some this.. Is it too weak, but two too strong? Points can't rally compensate there, the stats probably need to come down.

Say you give the interceptor dial to the current defender... Why do I take an interceptor anymore? And why does it feel like I just added 3 shields (12 points) to an alpha squad 18 points... Point wise and stat wise we are in the right place, and our mini looks different, but that interceptor dial with boost on a defender makes it feel like, uh, an interceptor? I can already take a hull + shield upgrade on an interceptor for 30 points, and have a near enough ship to the defender you want.... I suppose you could build that and just use a defender model.

I like that they've made the defender play different. It seems balanced so far, and it's fun (for me). I agree, the tight turns at a bit punitive, combined with only straight greens. If only it had a slot for an r2 droid! (Though, that'd be broken, no red at all.....) I don't know if you've tried vessery w outmaneuver and a shuttle w st321 or a tie bomber, but there is a ship that needs no actions, and flies perfectly well with stress....

1 Pilot Skill

4 Attack

4 Defense

3 Hull

3 Shields

That should be 46 points (as per this: http://community.fantasyflightgames.com/index.php?%2Ftopic%2F72935-reverse-engineered-squad-point-formula%2F )

I like the game design decisions made on the Defender. It doesn't make any sense as portrayed in the lore. Bigger! Faster! Tougher! More Maneuverable! More Guns! It doesn't make any trade-offs, whereas almost everything else does.

The trade-offs are clear: cost, underproduced.

I am an engineer, so I'm not just making this up when I say that the Defender as represented in the video games is just silly. Even for Star Wars.

You don't say? So how many starfighters have you worked on in your engineering career?

It has nothing to do with how many "starfighters" he has or has not worked on, but the fact that the Defender in the EU was ridiculous by any standard. It was a broken ship. The Defender was designed by a game engineer to be the be all end all ship in a single player only game. In single player games, the player practically expects to be akin to a god by the end, and the Defender was designed for that simple reason. In real life a military craft that is near perfect at everything is either a.) totally unrealistic, or b.) totally cost prohibitive to create more than a handful of.

For a miniatures game designed to be played by multiple people, such a craft is simply ludicrous.

The TIE Defender (the canon version) is what you get when you have the best of the best in the galaxy of designers and engineers and a budge with no limit.

Not unlike the P-51 Mustang, the Spitfire or to be more modern the F-22 Raptor.

I like the game design decisions made on the Defender. It doesn't make any sense as portrayed in the lore. Bigger! Faster! Tougher! More Maneuverable! More Guns! It doesn't make any trade-offs, whereas almost everything else does.

The trade-offs are clear: cost, underproduced.

I am an engineer, so I'm not just making this up when I say that the Defender as represented in the video games is just silly. Even for Star Wars.

You don't say? So how many starfighters have you worked on in your engineering career?

It has nothing to do with how many "starfighters" he has or has not worked on, but the fact that the Defender in the EU was ridiculous by any standard. It was a broken ship. The Defender was designed by a game engineer to be the be all end all ship in a single player only game. In single player games, the player practically expects to be akin to a god by the end, and the Defender was designed for that simple reason. In real life a military craft that is near perfect at everything is either a.) totally unrealistic, or b.) totally cost prohibitive to create more than a handful of.

For a miniatures game designed to be played by multiple people, such a craft is simply ludicrous.

Biophysical is effectively correct. There are some design obstacles that a budget cannot overcome, and as the defender is depicted in these sources, the craft exceeds these limitations (wherever, specifically, they would actually lie). This puts the fighter into ExpatSmuggler's "totally unrealistic" rather than "totally cost prohibitive."

Even in Star Wars Physics, the TIE Defender so far outclasses everything else that it would have to be packaged in something other than a fighter. It just doesn't make sense. AlphaTwo's comparison would be more appropriate if the F-22 could stop in place, read another pilot's mind to determine hostile intent, and then vaporize it with a super laser.

The F22 isn't even dramatically faster, more maneuverable, tougher, or better armed than other equivalent fighters. Its stealth and sensors are what (theoretically) puts it so far above everything else. You might be able to make a historical parallel to the Me-262, which was so much better because it had a next generation power plant (jet engine). It was so excellent compared to its contemporaries just because it was the first of its type. If the lore had a host of new fighters based off of TIE Defender technology that equaled or surpassed it a few years later, it would fall into this category. I don't know myself, I pretty much only read Tim Zahn's books.

I think the defender will really shine in epic play with ion or hlc I can see it taking a transport or corvette down at range 3. Imagine 3 of them with Jon us putting down some hurt with HLC at range 3

I only expect that those who so faithfully advocate for the defender to be consequent with themselves and field it on their lists in the next regionals.

If I don't see the next regionals filled with defenders, I'll consider this thread a gigantic waste of time. It will be like an "I love interceptors" 2.0 ... "Woah! Interceptors!!!, wonderful ships! so agile! what firepower!... I won't field a single one in my tournament list... but, how awesome they are!"

Yes, because the handful of us that advocate that the Defender is not an "awful" and totally broken ship represent the multitude of players that will be fielding lists at the next regionals...

I only expect that those who so faithfully advocate for the defender to be consequent with themselves and field it on their lists in the next regionals.

If I don't see the next regionals filled with defenders, I'll consider this thread a gigantic waste of time. It will be like an "I love interceptors" 2.0 ... "Woah! Interceptors!!!, wonderful ships! so agile! what firepower!... I won't field a single one in my tournament list... but, how awesome they are!"

I had to lol when I read this.

So true. Everyone has to be a devil's advocate.

If we really want to get down to the finer details the TIE Defender in X-Wing (mini game not PC) is a completely different ship than the one from TIE Fighter. It's model more closely matches the variant in X-Wing Alliance and from various guide books and the old Hasbro toy from the late 90's that made it look like a Tri-Winged Interceptor rather than the heavy fighter/bomber variant in TIE Fighter. The one in the old TIE Fighter game was a much larger ship with a completely different design compared to later in X-Wing Alliance and other sources.

That first version of the Defender could of easily been able to live up to most of it's in game performance stats. The XWA and the version we have in X-Wing doesn't have the space for the larger engines and reactor, it also has the smaller Interceptor wings and a normal TIE ball cockpit. With the newer Defender it would be unrealistic to expect it to be able to perform like the old one.

Think of it as being the more streamlined production model. Still cutting edge, still having atleast equal footing if not an advantage over anything the Alliance has but retooled to use existing parts, to reduce cost of maintenance and retraining of maintenance crews and pilots. That way it keeps more parts common across all production TIE models.

I used the F-22 as an example of a run away budget, it has thrust vectoring and all those other fancy new wiz-bang things that make it a step ahead of everything else. Maybe the F-35 would of been a better budget example lol. I can't get quotes to work, but Sideslip, your comment there made me think of the old Firefox movie. You must think in Russian! (quote from the movie).

Both the original stats and the revised XWA stats are listed in the Wookieepedia entry near the end of the article:
Defender stats from Tie Fighter PC Game
155 MGLT
175 DPF

Defender stats from X-Wing Alliance PC Game
144 MGLT
110 DPF

Tie Fighter stats?
100 MGLT
100 DPF

Either Defender 'version' should still out-class the Tie Fighter on speed and turn radius.

The point mechanics help balance the game, yes... But the stat constraints matter as well. For example, consider a 4 attack 4 defense version of the defender with access to ptl. How many points would that be worth... Give it a great dial too.... Say you can run 1 and some this.. Is it too weak, but two too strong? Points can't rally compensate there, the stats probably need to come down.

Say you give the interceptor dial to the current defender... Why do I take an interceptor anymore? And why does it feel like I just added 3 shields (12 points) to an alpha squad 18 points... Point wise and stat wise we are in the right place, and our mini looks different, but that interceptor dial with boost on a defender makes it feel like, uh, an interceptor? I can already take a hull + shield upgrade on an interceptor for 30 points, and have a near enough ship to the defender you want.... I suppose you could build that and just use a defender model.

I like that they've made the defender play different. It seems balanced so far, and it's fun (for me). I agree, the tight turns at a bit punitive, combined with only straight greens. If only it had a slot for an r2 droid! (Though, that'd be broken, no red at all.....) I don't know if you've tried vessery w outmaneuver and a shuttle w st321 or a tie bomber, but there is a ship that needs no actions, and flies perfectly well with stress....

1 Pilot Skill

4 Attack

4 Defense

3 Hull

3 Shields

That should be 46 points (as per this: http://community.fantasyflightgames.com/index.php?%2Ftopic%2F72935-reverse-engineered-squad-point-formula%2F )

Welcome to Powercreep. I will take a Stealth Device please and add a PtL. Surely this thing has Evade or it would not be the most maneuvrable ship there is. Dial must also have a lot of green, stress should not be a problem for the best fighter in the galaxy. Oh! And I'll add Advanced Sensor too, in case someone had the stupid idea to try and block me.

Phantom is already borderline with the 4 attack dice and 4 agility while cloaked. Please keep Attack Wing out of this game.

The Defender is fine as it is. That's a fun vessel to fly that bring something new to the table, not just an upgraded Interceptor. As much as I was the first to be negative about the ship because of its dial, now I really like it and have yet to use it in a game and think that I'm crippled by a lack of possibilty. If you want to make it be the fastest, take an Engine Upgrade. I personally tried it with it and never used it because it was useless.

As for the only straight green and the trouble to get rid of stress, look at it this way. First, don't stress yourself, you don't need the 1-2 hard turn with a banking 1 and a 4 k-turn. Second, if you do get stressed by an opponent (R3-A2 or flechette torpedo), consider it like a Ion Token but at least you still get to choose between a 2 to 5 straight. And if you are REALLY worried about stress, get an Engine Upgrade, this way you can still bank after your straight.

There is a learning curve to the ship, it's not an easy fighter to fly.Used badly it will look like it is an overpriced ship. Use it properly and it will pay off!

1 Pilot Skill

4 Attack

4 Defense

3 Hull

3 Shields

That should be 46 points (as per this: http://community.fantasyflightgames.com/index.php?%2Ftopic%2F72935-reverse-engineered-squad-point-formula%2F )

I feel like you missed my point, maybe I didn't explain well what I meant.

We know that that formula is not accurate, as it doesn't account for dials, or all wave 2, 3 and 4 ships. Assuming it did... Would that defender be balanced at those stats and point value? Something curious happens as you reduce your firepower via number of shots. Attack 2 also really struggles against 4 agility. So it's possible that this ship is balanced against some squads, but destroys a great many others. Just play a test game against 8 z-95s with the interceptor dial and those stats, make it "fair" by taking 2 defenders, with ions maybe.

Say 2 defenders is too strong (and these defenders are under costed at 46 points) so you cost them at 51 points... And then you find 1 defender lists are all too weak... You have an imbalance... This situation wouldn't be something point balance can really solve. Points are certainly part of what balance a ship, but only a part.

To each their own I guess. The boost action to me, seems to be for those that fill an interceptor role, rather than the X-wings and Defenders superiority role.

Are you referring to roles in terms of their place in the strategic thinking of the Galactic Empire's military-industrial complex in the lore, or in terms of what they can do in this particular game?

The point mechanics help balance the game, yes... But the stat constraints matter as well. For example, consider a 4 attack 4 defense version of the defender with access to ptl. How many points would that be worth... Give it a great dial too.... Say you can run 1 and some this.. Is it too weak, but two too strong? Points can't rally compensate there, the stats probably need to come down.

Say you give the interceptor dial to the current defender... Why do I take an interceptor anymore? And why does it feel like I just added 3 shields (12 points) to an alpha squad 18 points... Point wise and stat wise we are in the right place, and our mini looks different, but that interceptor dial with boost on a defender makes it feel like, uh, an interceptor? I can already take a hull + shield upgrade on an interceptor for 30 points, and have a near enough ship to the defender you want.... I suppose you could build that and just use a defender model.

I like that they've made the defender play different. It seems balanced so far, and it's fun (for me). I agree, the tight turns at a bit punitive, combined with only straight greens. If only it had a slot for an r2 droid! (Though, that'd be broken, no red at all.....) I don't know if you've tried vessery w outmaneuver and a shuttle w st321 or a tie bomber, but there is a ship that needs no actions, and flies perfectly well with stress....

1 Pilot Skill

4 Attack

4 Defense

3 Hull

3 Shields

That should be 46 points (as per this: http://community.fantasyflightgames.com/index.php?%2Ftopic%2F72935-reverse-engineered-squad-point-formula%2F )

That formula is worthless. If you want a correct formula for determining value of an arbitrary stat line, see my thread here:

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

2/3/3/0 is worth exactly 12 points at PS1.

3/3/3/3 is worth about 24 points at PS1.

4/4/3/3 is worth about 35 points at PS1. (since it was brought up as an example)

The Defender costs 30 points. Its stat line cost efficiency (cost/value) is actually a hair lower than the TIE Advanced. It's 6 point difference cannot be made up for by a white K-turn. See the wave 4 Regionals thread for TIE Defender usage. It barely gets used.

Oh cool. Thanks for the link!

Oh cool. Thanks for the link!

No problem, you're welcome.

There's lots of math involved and obviously a ship's value is based on much more than its stat line. But the Defender doesn't really have anything special going for it other than the white K-turn.

Think of it this way: would the TIE Advanced be a good ship if it had the TIE Defender dial? The answer to that question will almost exactly tell you how well balanced the TIE Defender is.

The low PS is the issue I have with it. Well that and how the mid level Def does not get an EPT slot while the Interceptor does.

I do think the white K is extremely undervalued by people, especially on a ship with the Defender's attack and durability. Strangely, it makes the Defender the best non-turret counter to the Phantom, because the Phantom has to make a huge guess on where the Defender might go when setting their dial. Being able to K at will throws a fairly large monkey wrench into things, especially on a ship capable of surviving the alpha strike. Its application is just not as obvious as the Phantom's, so people are going for the easy shiny new toy first. I also think no one has built the right sort of list for it yet and are just trying to shoehorn it into existing lists and roles.

sigh

Just proof that pure math alone doesn't determine a balanced ship. You are insane if you think 4/4/3/3 begins to be balanced anywhere under 40 pts.

sigh

Just proof that pure math alone doesn't determine a balanced ship. You are insane if you think 4/4/3/3 begins to be balanced anywhere under 40 pts.

Counter-point: nuh-uh!

Seriously though, what proof? Has FFG released a 4/4/3/3 ship that I am not aware of?