The Defender is fine, it's the pilots which imo suck terribly, this ship needed a noname pilot with an EPT slot, but instead got 2 pilots with abilities which have certain conditions like a lot of Empire pilots have. FFG obviously hasn't learned from some past mistakes.

The Defender is fine, it's the pilots which imo suck terribly, this ship needed a noname pilot with an EPT slot, but instead got 2 pilots with abilities which have certain conditions like a lot of Empire pilots have. FFG obviously hasn't learned from some past mistakes.

Have you played with these pilots yet? Vessery is a straight up beast. I ran tonight with

Vessery

-Outmaneuver

Backstabber

-Targetting Computer

Scimitar Squadron

Academy Pilot x 2

-Targeting Computer

and just straight tore things up. Took on two Han lists and took down two Falcons and three X-Wings without getting downed himself. Sure I had to build the list to suit him, but who cares? Rebels do the same thing when building around Wes, Garven, or the HWKs. That's just how squad building works.

And in defense of Rexler Brath, I ran him tonight in two games with Predator, and he was a beast! Thanks to the added reroll, saving my focus was pretty easy. In the first game he tore through a Chewbacca Falcon only losing 1 shield in the process. As far as survivability goes, the first game he finished with just one shield token chipped off by Chewbacca. In the second game he got knocked down to two hull points left, but kept fighting on to the end.

Does that mean he is worth the 40 points it took to field him? Not positive he's worth quite that much, but he definitely was the Ship of the Match in both games. It also helped that I ran him alongside a Bounty Hunter and two Obsidians to dish out solid damage as well. Might try switching out the two Obsidians for a PtL Royal Guard Pilot next time.

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.

I have a LOT of respect for all your work Major, but except for the Tie Fighter stats, the others just seems wrong. With those numbers, it's like saying that raising the agility and shield by 1 on an X-Wing would cost only 3 points. Sure, it has PS 2 instead of one, but it also has the Astromech slot. That's also implying that the Defender is overcost by 6 points, or that giving 3 shield to an Interceptor, the ship with one of the best dial and action bar, would cost only 6 points. There is something missing.

And regarding the Advanced, if it had the Defender dial, yes, I would take it more often. I consider it that good.

While I think Brath is mainly for PS8 on a beatstick ship, and less about his special ability, although I think Vessery has a pretty strong ability. You're basically getting a bunch of free target locks. I do think the Onyx really did need a EPT slot, but the PS1 on the Delta is kind of an advantage, in a way. You can really use your speed, knowing that nobody will be able to get in your way. You'll also always know that the white K-turn will work, which is great once the dogfight happens.

Thinking about it more, Brath gives you a puncher's chance to really mess up any large ships without shields. It's just flexibility with how you use focus. Say you roll two hits and an eye vs. a Falcon with no shields but lots of hull. 2 crits is probably better in the long run than 3 hits. So you spend your focus that way and hope for some crits.

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 Advanced's problem does not lie with its dial, it lies with the fact that it couldn't fight its way out of a paper bag. Saying that it's still not great if you give it another ship's dial proves nothing, for either ship.

The point is that because the statline cost to value ratio of the TIE Advanced and TIE Defender are almost identical, the two are equally worthless at "fighting their way out of a paper bag". That the Defender costs more, and therefore has a corresponding increase in attack*defense, is irrelevant - only the overall cost efficiency matters if all you are comparing are how well various ships roll dice and take damage. Compare 3 TIE Advanced to 2 TIE Defenders: they cost about the same, and will get you nearly the same attack and durability. The only significant difference between the two squads are their dials. The Defender's dial probably is better than the TIE Advanced, due to the white K-turn. But it's not enough to make the ship's overall cost efficiency very good, nor equivalently would giving the TIE Advanced the Defender dial suddenly make the Advanced a very good craft to use. Make sense?

Thanks! And fair enough, lets look at the your examples. Everything is by definition a relative measurement, and since I use he 2/3/3/0 PS1 TIE Fighter as the standard, so of course it must by definition be 12 points.

With those numbers, it's like saying that raising the agility and shield by 1 on an X-Wing would cost only 3 points. Sure, it has PS 2 instead of one, but it also has the Astromech slot.

The X-wing actually makes a really good example of showing that the math works. Lets look at the numbers.

A 3/2/3/2 stat line is worth about 18.5 points at PS1. The X-wing has an effective PS1 cost of 20, making its statline efficiency about 92%. This is OK, but not nearly as good as the B-wing (97%), Z-95 (106.5%), or TIE Fighter (100%). As you pointed out, the X-wing has some other capabilities that the standard TIE Fighter does not have, such as a droid slot and Target Lock instead of barrel roll and evade. The dial is also different. All said and done, these factors come out slightly in favor of the X-wing. It's well beyond the scope of this discussion to try and figure out how to value all that stuff, since I was only tossing around statline jousting efficiency. However if we skip to the results in that thread, the X-wing's overall efficiency is predicted to be about 94%. That's reasonable enough that the ship sees use, but it still can't quite compete with the B-wing or Z-95 in overall cost effectiveness. In other words, a PS2 Rookie Pilot is probably overcosted by about 1 point relative to the PS1 Academy Pilot.

If you look at the Regionals results for wave 4, and look at the usage statistics of only non-named pilots, you will see that generic X-wing use has REALLY plummeted in the wave 4 meta, in favor of the Z-95. Generic B-wings are still being used a reasonable amount. And this is exactly what the mathematical models would predict: each time we get a new ship that is more cost effective than the old X-wing, we see its usage drop. It happened with wave 3 with the B-wing, and it is really taking effect in wave 4 with the Z-95 now.

Yes, I agree that the Defender is better off than the Advanced. It's still not a very good ship overall, I don't think, but it is better. The wave 4 Regional results bear this out. The TIE Defender is at around 1% of weighted average points spent now. Time will tell if people can figure out how to squeeze more performance out of it. So far early results are not promising for the Defender.

TL;DR: calculating statline cost efficiency using my method is very accurate but is only a starting point: you obviously still need to consider everything else about the ship!

Hope that helps!

So you are saying that you would be okay if there was an upgrade, Interceptor only, that grants 3 shields for 6 points? That means a 36 points PS9 Soontir Fel with PtL and 3/3/3/3 stats, or a PS6 Royal Guard with PtL and 3/3/3/3 stats for 31 pts.

Regarding the X-Wing, the more ship/wave that come our way, the more likely a ship is to not being use, unless the ship is too good a deal. That's what diversity bring. The generic X-Wing started to see less playing time since the B-Wing hit the table. It does what the X-Wing does but better, so maybe it has more to do with the B-Wing being too good than the X-Wing being overprice. Only role left for it was the filler. Before wave 4, we saw a lot of X-Wing in HSF list because player wanted the cheapest, yet reliable ship. Now that the Z-95 can fill this roll, the X-Wing has a harder time finding a home. But in no way would I be okay if suddenly we could give it one more agility and 1 more shield for 3 points, that would be wrong and make it too good. Imagine a squad of 4 of those with R2 unit.

Defender, just like the E-Wing, seems to me that they are victim of the harder to understand ship. Wave 4 is still new and players still haven't had a chance to explore the new avenues, so they go the easy way: Phantom, Z-95 and turrets to counter the Phantom. We will get a better picture in a year. It took a long time for the Interceptors to came in tournaments, or the bombers. Unless the role is too obvious, it takes a while to fully adopt a new ship. Going into battle with a ship you have yet to understand yourself is not wise.

Anyway, keep up the good work, but on this one, I won't be able to agree with you. A 3/3/3/3 ship can't be worth 24 pts, a 4/4/3/3 point can't be worth 35. That would bring an imbalance.

EDIT: Edited because I wrote 30 pts for the 4/4/3/3 ship instead of 35.

...Which is a fair point. It's a criticism leveled in the past at the advanced - it's sandwiched between TIE fighters and Defenders and struggles to make any single role its own.

The X-wing now has that same problem itself - imagine a triangle with cost efficiency, firepower/durability and agility/speed as the axes; the Z, B and E wing fighters each sit at the apexes - leaving increasingly little tactical space for the archetypical X-wing.

It's not so much of a problem, though; in much the same way that Darth Vader deserves to be considered seperately from the TIE advanced, the X-wing has the simultaneously widest selection of named pilots and some of most powerful abilities.

I don't see how some people are saying that the tech specs of the Defender don't match their expectations, when it is technically the most advanced small fighter. All threes. Why is this bad? How is this "a disappointment"?

I don't see how some people are saying that the tech specs of the Defender don't match their expectations, when it is technically the most advanced small fighter. All threes. Why is this bad? How is this "a disappointment"?

Because the game it is from has some very specific comparisons it doesn't match. For instance better shields than the B wing.(I don't see this as too big a deal, but I'm more gae less fluff oriented.)

So you are saying that you would be okay if there was an upgrade, Interceptor only, that grants 3 shields for 6 points? That means a 36 points PS9 Soontir Fel with PtL and 3/3/3/3 stats, or a PS6 Royal Guard with PtL and 3/3/3/3 stats for 31 pts.

You're missing the point. He's providing a mathematical model to predict the jousting and cost efficiency of the ships. These are relative to the 12 point Tie Fighter. He already conceded that there are other factors that are more difficult to put a point value on. He provided examples of how his model would accurately predict ship usage, demonstrating that the model has value. But like any model, it has it's limitations, and he readily admits that.

Since his model predicts that the Defender's stat line is overpriced, the ship has to feature something else to justify this. It's the white K-turn in this case and, again, many of us think that the dial is overvalued. It seems that FFG compensated for the white Kturn by not only increasing the point cost of the ship, but by also making compromises on the dial itself. I've already ranted about how limiting it is to only have straight green maneuvers. It limits your EPT choices and it makes stress more crippling for the Defender than most other ships. A Defender without its defensive focus is in trouble, not because it can't tank a decent number of shots, but because the point investment is too high to take that risk. That white kturn has the most value in the end game and you want your Defender to live to see it because it cost you a third of your points, not dissimilar from PTL Soontir.

Defender, just like the E-Wing, seems to me that they are victim of the harder to understand ship. Wave 4 is still new and players still haven't had a chance to explore the new avenues, so they go the easy way: Phantom, Z-95 and turrets to counter the Phantom. We will get a better picture in a year. It took a long time for the Interceptors to came in tournaments, or the bombers. Unless the role is too obvious, it takes a while to fully adopt a new ship. Going into battle with a ship you have yet to understand yourself is not wise.

I think the E-Wing is incredible. It has one of the best dials in the game. For me, it's value is very obvious. First off, it's base stats are respectable. Secondly, it has two of the best upgrade slots in the game: astromech and systems. Having both of these slots on one ship is incredibly valuable. Thirdly, it handles stress decently, unlike the defender, and this can be further enhanced by the 1 point R2 astromech. Handling stress well makes taking EPTs that stress you more viable.

The E-Wing's customization and maneuverability allows for a lot of potential combos. Here's a few:

1. Give Corran FCS and he can perform his second shot with a target lock.

2. R2D2 + PTL + Advanced Sensors. Take two actions before you reveal your dial. Reveal a green to clear your stress the same turn and recover a shield. Alternatively, take R2 astromech for a cheaper build, and give yourself more options for green maneuvers; a decision between maneuverability and survivability. And with PTL, you can take the focus + evade combo to further enhance survivability. One of the few rebel ships that can do that, and it's one with 5 HP and three agility, mind you.

3. R2 astromech + PTL + Advanced Sensors + Engine Upgrade. Give your E-Wing god-like maneuverability options. You can boost and barrel roll before revealing your maneuver, making the E-Wing far more unpredictable than what people claim the Defender to be.

Sure, these builds are pricey, but the value is clear as day to me. I'm sure there will be a lot of clever builds people will devise for the ship. As an imperial player, I'd gladly trade the Ewing's stat line, customization, and dial for the Defender. And I've fielded the Defender in every game I've played since wave 4 released. Fun ship to fly, but I can't justify the cost in the end.

I don't see how some people are saying that the tech specs of the Defender don't match their expectations, when it is technically the most advanced small fighter. All threes. Why is this bad? How is this "a disappointment"?

Because the game it is from has some very specific comparisons it doesn't match. For instance better shields than the B wing.(I don't see this as too big a deal, but I'm more gae less fluff oriented.)

And the fact that except for the white K-turn its dial is about as maneuverable in this game as the Tie Bomber.

The TIE Bomber has a bad dial?

The Defender's dial is unique. It will take some getting used to. For me, I am preferring the 1 banks over the Fighter or Interceptor. And of course, the one time I tried it with Rexlar, he had Predator, so stress if needed, did not bother me. The dial defies traditional thought on maneuvering. That doesn't mean it's bad. Just that you might not like it. I personally love the dial and know the K-turn is not overvalued.

I don't see how some people are saying that the tech specs of the Defender don't match their expectations, when it is technically the most advanced small fighter. All threes. Why is this bad? How is this "a disappointment"?

Because the game it is from has some very specific comparisons it doesn't match. For instance better shields than the B wing.(I don't see this as too big a deal, but I'm more gae less fluff oriented.)

And the fact that except for the white K-turn its dial is about as maneuverable in this game as the Tie Bomber.

The TIE bomber has a much better selection of green maneuvers and straight maneuvers. I'll thank you to stop maligning the TIE bomber's dial by comparing it to the TIE defender!

It was never going to have the ability from the TIE Fighter computer game (I quote Lucasarts re putting it in X-wing vs TIE Fighter - "Dream On Fanboys") but it's historically been 'the best' fighter, and everyone has their own view on what 'best' should mean, but many want it to be the best at everything evar!11!!!!1!

The game rules, for example, do not allow a ship with a small base to be faster in a dead run than a TIE Interceptor or A-wing, so making it feel fast is difficult.

I think they did well, giving it a feel of speed but speed at a cost of low-speed manouvrability - I think people's main concern is that they see it as a touch overpriced. Dunno. Happy with my TIE fighters and TIE Advanced, personally.

The TIE Bomber has a bad dial?

The Defender's dial is unique. It will take some getting used to. For me, I am preferring the 1 banks over the Fighter or Interceptor. And of course, the one time I tried it with Rexlar, he had Predator, so stress if needed, did not bother me. The dial defies traditional thought on maneuvering. That doesn't mean it's bad. Just that you might not like it. I personally love the dial and know the K-turn is not overvalued.

Totally agree with this. In playing this game and watching other people play this game it seems that most people fly the same way. They fly all their ships towards the other guy until both sides are in a big blob. They all stay in that blob and keep firing at close range until someone dies.

The defender REALLY works best at range 3. Range 3 with an HLC and it becomes a beast. It's incredibly difficult to kill and is handing out 4 die shots without an increase in agility. The dial also expects you to do that. If you get stressed or someone gets too close, run away and turn around to come back again.

Also, sure the 1 and 2 turns are red, but it's better than not having them. It has every maneuver in the game but a 1 straight. And honestly, I've only ever needed to use a red turn on a defender once.

It's just a ship that begs to be flown differently than how ships have traditionally been flown.

I don't see how some people are saying that the tech specs of the Defender don't match their expectations, when it is technically the most advanced small fighter. All threes. Why is this bad? How is this "a disappointment"?

I will speak for myself when I say:

Dial & Lack of Boost Action

I also read some posts that are disappointed in the lack of a Elite Pilot upgrade for a standard pilot.

For the rest of you:

What if Darth Vader's official FFG ship was bright orange?

Functionally it's the same ship. But it's orange. It doesn't affect game play, it doesn't affect tournament results.

And yet it's orange.

This game is tied to the story. Ships are modeled to spec to match what they look like in the lore.

Their stats also reflect how they should perform in the lore.

The Defender does not do that.

The Defender does not manuever as it should.

"Oh but it's got a white k-turn!"

It also can't turn at speed 1 or 2 and peform an action until on a later turn it goes straight.

A Tie Fighter, a less capable ship, can hard 1 and focus. Yet the Defender is such a clunky ship that it can't hard 1 and take an action? Shenanigans.

^ Word...

I would have been fine if either: A) The 1 banks were green (even substitute the 5 green or 1 green) OR B) It had boost in the action bar.

Preferably the best would be a white 2- turn. The freaking Y-Wing has a white 2-turn for crying out loud!! The Y-WING!!!

So you are saying that you would be okay if there was an upgrade, Interceptor only, that grants 3 shields for 6 points? That means a 36 points PS9 Soontir Fel with PtL and 3/3/3/3 stats, or a PS6 Royal Guard with PtL and 3/3/3/3 stats for 31 pts.

You're missing the point. He's providing a mathematical model to predict the jousting and cost efficiency of the ships. These are relative to the 12 point Tie Fighter. He already conceded that there are other factors that are more difficult to put a point value on. He provided examples of how his model would accurately predict ship usage, demonstrating that the model has value. But like any model, it has it's limitations, and he readily admits that.

I'm not missing the point, I'm saying that the mathematical model might be a little off if a 3/3/3/3 ship should cost 24 pts or a 4/4/3/3 ship cost 35pts. I get that there is other factor in his equation and that he's bright enough to figure them out and take them into account. But coming into a discussion and just saying low prices for the stats without painting the bigger picture, or just omitting informations for the sake of being right, is wrong. What do you get for this 35 pts? Are you just able to move to a 3 straight? Can you turn? What is your possible actions? Can you clear stress easily or is all your maneuver is red? Big Base or Small Base? What are the possible upgrades that could erase an initial flaw?

Value of the ship is not just their stats but what they can bring to the table and the potential for abuse. With his equation, the X-Wing is overprice by one. Fair enough. but I'm not sure I would like to see a 5 X-Wing team in a 100pts game. The 1 point is there to prevent that. And in all the game I played, and from all the opponent I had, nobody ever said that the X-Wing is overprice or got the feeling of being cheated when they bring one to the table. Saying that, since we don't see the ship in tournament play, the formula must be good don't take into account that maybe there is just a better ship to fill his role, like when the B-Wing came out. Now the Z-95 took his place as filler but, when the Chardaan A-Wing come out for 15pts, will the Z-95 suddenly be overcost just because we don't see it as much on the table?

Is the equation take into account the potential abuse? We can already have trouble hitting a 3 agility with a Stealth Device if the action economy is good enough. How much would it scale if suddenly we have a natural 4 agility that can take stealth device and raise the bar to 5 dice+evade. Is bringing a 2 attack dice ship be viable anymore or should we just scrap them? I don't think it's a coincidence that ACD is a modification and not just part of the cloaking action. It mitigates the possible abuses. You could potentially have 5 defense dice with a Phantom, but you would not attack that turn, and as soon as you decide to attack, you'll be open for the whole combat phase with 3 defense dice. It should not be that hard to hit you and get rid of your Stealth Device for the subsequent turn.

As for the E-Wing, I never said it was overpriced or a bad ship. I love the ship and all he can bring! I was just giving a reason why I think we don't see it yet in tournament and that it has nothing to do with the actual price of the ship. Just like the Defender.

I'm still not seeing the problem with dial, gamewise or lorewise. Lorewise, it is fast. So fast, that going slow might be a bit more difficult for it. Gamewise, it is able to go slower than the Fighter or Interceptor, which is pretty big. Sure, you have to snake a bit with the 1 banks, but it is better for going slow than the 2 straight.

I'm still not seeing the problem with dial, gamewise or lorewise. Lorewise, it is fast. So fast, that going slow might be a bit more difficult for it. Gamewise, it is able to go slower than the Fighter or Interceptor, which is pretty big. Sure, you have to snake a bit with the 1 banks, but it is better for going slow than the 2 straight.

Reminds me of the Me262... too fast for his time.

Why tail a ship when you can strafe it, turn back on a dime and do it again?

And if someone want the Boost Action so bad to have a feeling of going faster, I'll say it again, there is an upgrade card made especially for that: Engine Upgrade.

I have used it poorly a few times. I tend to treat it like a tank because of the hull and shields. next time I will play it more like an interceptor and see what happens.

So you are saying that you would be okay if there was an upgrade, Interceptor only, that grants 3 shields for 6 points? That means a 36 points PS9 Soontir Fel with PtL and 3/3/3/3 stats, or a PS6 Royal Guard with PtL and 3/3/3/3 stats for 31 pts.

You're missing the point. He's providing a mathematical model to predict the jousting and cost efficiency of the ships. These are relative to the 12 point Tie Fighter. He already conceded that there are other factors that are more difficult to put a point value on. He provided examples of how his model would accurately predict ship usage, demonstrating that the model has value. But like any model, it has it's limitations, and he readily admits that.

I'm not missing the point, I'm saying that the mathematical model might be a little off if a 3/3/3/3 ship should cost 24 pts or a 4/4/3/3 ship cost 35pts. I get that there is other factor in his equation and that he's bright enough to figure them out and take them into account.

If you understand that the stat line value is only part of a ship's overall value, then why did you use the example of a TIE Interceptor costed at 100% jousting efficiency? Obviously that would be overpowered.

Reality: a 3/3/3/0 stat line has a value of 16 points, so the 18 point PS1 Alpha has an efficiency of 89.5%. That matches what we already know about the ship: don't joust with it, even with the PS1 Alphas. The ship has more greens + Boost, so Elites can really take advantage of the maneuverability. Alphas can be squeezed into a standard jousting swarm if you build your entire list around keeping them safe or shooting first (Swarm Tactics, or Stealth + rear formation flying, etc).

It's not saying that "any ship" should be valued at 24 points at 3/3/3/3. It's saying that the standard TIE Fighter would have the same overall cost efficiency if it had +1 attack and +3 shields, and costed 24 points PS1 @ 3/3/3/3. And any ship that has the same efficiency as the standard TIE Fighter is going to be very, very good.

We don't even have a 4/4/3/3 ship, so it impossible to use that as an empirical claim that the formula is broken. You are just waving your hands in the air.... your Jedi Mind tricks will not work on me! The closest we have is the ACD Phantom at 4/4/2/2 and guess what: the math predicts that it's WAY more cost efficient than a PtL Interceptor. Edit: See here: http://community.fantasyflightgames.com/index.php?/topic/109494-phantom-the-new-best-ship/page-6#entry1135633

Also, a 2/3/2/2 stat line is worth 14.5 points. So the Refit A-wing will have a stat line efficiency of 96.5%, on par with a B-wing. And it has a great dial + boost. So yes, I would expect the Refit A-wing to see some use, and probably cut into Rookie usage a little more. But it's not nearly as efficient as the Z-95, so most the shifting away from the non-named X-wings has already happened. Which leads into the last point...

You mentioned earlier that X-wing usage is dropping because more ships are being released. That's true to a small extent but the usage has dropped WAY more than proportional to 12/16. Non-named X-wing usage has dropped from 10.16% to 2.41%. That's significant, it is more than a factor of FOUR reduction! Check the Regionals thread for data. Simply put, the naked X-wing isn't quite cost efficient enough to keep up with other ships now. Whether that warrants a 1 point reduction on the Rookie and Red is another issue entirely.

I love the work you're doing with the stat line efficiency. And this is not disagreeing with anything you're saying, just an observation, but doesn't the TIE Fighter's vulnerability an ideal counterbalance to its efficiency?

By your stat lines, the TIE Fighter is the most efficient fighter in the game, but it is also by far the easiest ship to one-shot in the game. Every ship has it's plusses and minuses. This even makes sense for the fluff purists. Why did the standard TIE Fighter last for so long as the workhorse of the Empire and the Imperial Remnant? Because it was an extremely efficient fighter for how cheap it was. Yes, it was easily destroyed, but it was also easily replaceable. It's the same in the game, yes its stat line makes it the peak of efficiency, but it is very easy to one shot an eyeball.

It's like the game was designed and play-tested or something...

I love the work you're doing with the stat line efficiency. And this is not disagreeing with anything you're saying, just an observation, but doesn't the TIE Fighter's vulnerability an ideal counterbalance to its efficiency?

By your stat lines, the TIE Fighter is the most efficient fighter in the game, but it is also by far the easiest ship to one-shot in the game. Every ship has it's plusses and minuses. This even makes sense for the fluff purists. Why did the standard TIE Fighter last for so long as the workhorse of the Empire and the Imperial Remnant? Because it was an extremely efficient fighter for how cheap it was. Yes, it was easily destroyed, but it was also easily replaceable. It's the same in the game, yes its stat line makes it the peak of efficiency, but it is very easy to one shot an eyeball.

It's like the game was designed and play-tested or something...

Short answer: I am going to re-do durability calculations taking into account the average number of shots required to kill the ship, rather than just use the average damage numbers. So yes there is room for improvement, although I'm still going to use the average results, and not consider the standard deviation.

And technically the Z-95 is more efficient than the TIE Fighter, not including Howlrunner. TIEs + Howlrunner are around 117% efficient. Nasty good.