Here's the thing. The Old Tie Swarm had a ton of things going for it. The biggest was Holwrunner. Right now the Howlrunner swarm is seeing less play. It has a very hard time with Phantoms, and gets eaten alive bu the new cheaper missile delivery systems. Especially Blount and to a lesser extent Munitions failsafe. The Z-95 swarm you bring up doesn't bring that to the table.

4 Z-95s and a Falcon or maybe 5 and Etahn are the most you should ever be seeing on a table. I agree Zs are awesome, but now both they and Ties are best used in groups of 2-4.

Putting 8 on the table isn't likely to be incredibly viable, although it can work. You just have to be a master of dancing ships across the board, playing it like an epic game. Even then, you'll have troublll agility squads, and high agility squads are very good right now.

So the percentage is for Wave 3, that is to say, before the antiswarm Wave. And thus not that useful for Wave 4 meta.

The stuff built to kill TIE swarms works just as well on Z-95s.

If anything, I'd say better. Phantoms, E-Wings, Defenders, Vader, and several old ships like Black Squadrons and Royal Guards and even A-Wings can all take Outmaneuver. Additionally, they all have the dial or actions to make it work well. And an Outmaneuvered TIE still gets 2 evade dice. An outmaneuvered Headhunter gets 1. I think there's a big difference in survivability at that 1-2 jump. I'm not totally sure the numbers bear that statement out, I'm sure many someones will chime in if I'm wrong. But so far in my own personal experience (not so scientific I know but it's all I've got to go on) Headhunters fall to a single Outmaneuver shot from an Interceptor or Defender literally half the time (I've played 8 games against a squad with at least 1 Z-95). Additionally, about one quarter of the time, they've been taken to 1 hitpoint. On only two individual occasions have they survived to be fired on a third time. You'll note I said "fired on a third time", not "survived three rounds." Again, I will admit that one mans personal experience is by no means a valid field of data. But I am by no means impressed by what I still believe to be a quite serviceable ship.

However, I will lastly admit I've not faced them as a swarm. I would like to though, I want to see how they hold up en masse.

So the percentage is for Wave 3, that is to say, before the antiswarm Wave. And thus not that useful for Wave 4 meta.

Except for the fact that the primary anti-Tie swarm ship is the Z-95. Which itself can be made into a swarm of its own.

That came from someone in the forum, whom had collected all the results from all the tourneys played worldwide thus far.

What draw my eyes was the Tie swarm had the highest number wins followed by a 4 ship rebel squad (~ 25%). Maybe if he/she see this will re-post it. The article may be a few month back around the time before Imdarr Alpha. I am sure it was on the forum here.

I would caution you to remember that such a comparison reminds me of old console war comparisons. One company would come out and say "our console has sold X number more than the competitor" while failing to mention that they had a year and a half head start.

The TIE swarm has been around since the beginning, and so I would imagine it has had the most opportunity to garner victories. Thought I must admit I am ignorant as to how long it took from the inception of this game until worldwide championships or regionals and the like were established.

So the percentage is for Wave 3, that is to say, before the antiswarm Wave. And thus not that useful for Wave 4 meta.

Except for the fact that the primary anti-Tie swarm ship is the Z-95. Which itself can be made into a swarm of its own.

The Z-95 isn't anti-swarm tech at all, let alone a principal piece. The Z-95 offers nothing against a TIE swarm except for its potential as a platform for Assault Missiles; the missiles are the anti-swarm tech. (That is, you could have gotten very similar results prior to Wave 4 by loading up a bunch of TIE Bombers or A-wings with Assault Missiles, and no one's claiming those are anti-swarm.)

MajorJuggler has posted several times in the thread already, including this:

For the wave 3 meta TIE Swarms (6-8 TIEs) represent more like 33% according to my latest data, although that includes mixing in the occasional Interceptor and Bomber. I am collecting 2014 Regionals data and inputting it into Excel. Summary statistics here:

http://community.fantasyflightgames.com/index.php?/topic/105107-2014-regionals-results/?p=1066846

33% isn't the win percentage for TIE swarms; it's the proportion of lists that won or placed at a Regionals event with 6-8 Imperial ships.

And for everyone's reference again, its using a weighted average of:

attendance / squad placement

including only Final Cut or Top Third squads.

Here is a really good summary: http://community.fantasyflightgames.com/index.php?/topic/105107-2014-regionals-results/page-26#entry1154947

Z-95s are making excellent filler into existing lists, essentially displacing all non-named ship types except for B-wings. 5+ ship rebel swarms are more popular, but they're still not a major force.

Well I beat my first z-swarm tonight. 4 z95s with 2 xwings. Just barely won, though I made several movement errors that definitely didn't help me.

It's a lot to chew through for sure, but the x-wings (because of their upgrades, let alone their higher fire power) were much bigger thorns in my side than the z-95s.

So the percentage is for Wave 3, that is to say, before the antiswarm Wave. And thus not that useful for Wave 4 meta.

Except for the fact that the primary anti-Tie swarm ship is the Z-95. Which itself can be made into a swarm of its own.

The Z-95 isn't anti-swarm tech at all, let alone a principal piece. The Z-95 offers nothing against a TIE swarm except for its potential as a platform for Assault Missiles; the missiles are the anti-swarm tech. (That is, you could have gotten very similar results prior to Wave 4 by loading up a bunch of TIE Bombers or A-wings with Assault Missiles, and no one's claiming those are anti-swarm.)

This statement is so far out there that my respect for your X-Wing knowledge have dropped. I have yet to see the assault missile fly itself. Look at the PS and ship cost please... I will let others educate you on this ship. I need to stop, before I write something offensive.

I agree with Vorpal here, the z-95 by itself isn't really anti swarm. The assault missile is anti swarm tech, but you can run it on a yt or a-wing...

I think the strongest antiswarm tech in wave 4 is predator.

So the percentage is for Wave 3, that is to say, before the antiswarm Wave. And thus not that useful for Wave 4 meta.

Except for the fact that the primary anti-Tie swarm ship is the Z-95. Which itself can be made into a swarm of its own.

The Z-95 isn't anti-swarm tech at all, let alone a principal piece. The Z-95 offers nothing against a TIE swarm except for its potential as a platform for Assault Missiles; the missiles are the anti-swarm tech. (That is, you could have gotten very similar results prior to Wave 4 by loading up a bunch of TIE Bombers or A-wings with Assault Missiles, and no one's claiming those are anti-swarm.)

This statement is so far out there that my respect for your X-Wing knowledge have dropped. I have yet to see the assault missile fly itself. Look at the PS and ship cost please... I will let others educate you on this ship. I need to stop, before I write something offensive.

I don't think he's going to mind your lack of respect. It's not really a black mark given your remarks in this thread.

The assault missile is anti swarm tech, but you can run it on a yt or a-wing...

No, you really can't, for two reasons:

1) Other missile platforms are too expensive. A Z-95 with a missile is 17 points, compared to 22 for the cheapest a-wing or 47 for the cheapest YT. That means each missile you bring costs a bigger percentage of your total points, and you can't take as many in a viable list.

2) Blount doesn't fly a YT or a-wing. Seriously, Blount is the game-changer. For 22 points you get several assault missiles worth of splash damage. With a-wings you'll need at least 2-3 of them to have a good chance of getting splash damage against a TIE swarm, and that's half your points (or more!) invested in an anti-swarm counter. And of course forget about doing it with a YT, the single assault misisle shot you can bring isn't consistent enough to be more than a "well, I guess I don't have anything better for 5 points" option.

I've just completed a few battles using 3-12pt Zs and 3-12pt Ties. The Z wins pretty consistently (the higher PS is the difference). I played the Zs and used X-wing AI application to control the Ties.

I am wondering, if others are seeing the similar results.

I am pretty sure that the 8 Z vs 8 Tie (swarm vs swarm) will result in Z winning most of the times (due to the higher pilot skill) too. If this is the case, I can see the naked Z-swarm being more formidable than the 8-Tie Academy swarm. This in-turn makes the Z swarm more superior and perhaps the new swarm meta.

Could you tell me a lil more about this AI application you used to run the Imperial list??

The Z-95 isn't anti-swarm tech at all, let alone a principal piece. The Z-95 offers nothing against a TIE swarm except for its potential as a platform for Assault Missiles; the missiles are the anti-swarm tech. (That is, you could have gotten very similar results prior to Wave 4 by loading up a bunch of TIE Bombers or A-wings with Assault Missiles, and no one's claiming those are anti-swarm.)

This statement is so far out there that my respect for your X-Wing knowledge have dropped.

Yeah, that's not going to keep me awake at night.

I have yet to see the assault missile fly itself. Look at the PS and ship cost please... I will let others educate you on this ship. I need to stop, before I write something offensive.

I didn't say the Assault Missile flies itself--and, before you strain something getting on your high horse, I really don't need education on the Z-95. (If you read carefully, you'll note that I've said several times in the thread that it's a very effective ship.)

What I said was this:

...you could have gotten very similar results prior to Wave 4 by loading up a bunch of TIE Bombers or A-wings with Assault Missiles, and no one's claiming those are anti-swarm.

Here, I'm addressing the claim that the Z-95 is anti-swarm tech, because you said the Z-95 is anti-swarm tech that can be made into a swarm. The problem is that a naked Z-95 isn't effective against a TIE swarm; a Z-95's most likely result when attacking even a TIE with no way to modify its defenses is 0. (It takes five of those attacks for the median result to be the TIE's death; not coincidentally, it takes the same five attacks for a group of TIEs to be able to kill a Z-95.)

So a group of Z-95s without upgrades really has just one advantage against a similarly sized group of TIEs, and that's their +1 PS at the same cost. If the TIEs are able to take advantage of their ability to block and reposition with barrel roll, or if the TIE swarm happens to attack at PS4+ or 5+, the Headhunters will probably lose.

Of course, a group of Z-95s with Assault Missiles is a different story. You can run up to 5 of these, which is more than you could before the Headhunter's release--although I don't really think spamming Assault Missiles to that degree is a particularly smart plan. But running three of them is perfectly defensible in a swarm-heavy (or Biggs-heavy or Swarm Tactics-heavy) metagame, and they do indeed cut swarms up nicely.

But you could easily have run the same 3-4 Assault Missiles in either faction before the Headhunter's release. In particular, there are nice and effective TIE Bomber lists out there than can launch multiple rounds of any ordnance you like, including Assault Missiles, with a pair of them going out with Jonus' reroll to help ensure their accuracy.

iPeregrine brought up Blount, but that doesn't work either: Blount interacts with Assault Missiles to become a very potent anti-swarm piece, but if you sub out the Assault Missiles with (say) Ion Pulse Missiles, he's now a potent control piece against small lists--but he's no longer very scary to a swarm. So it's clearly an interaction effect, and it's about one pilot rather than the ship as a whole.

To sum up, then:

(1) Z-95s without upgrades aren't particularly effective against the TIE swarm unless they can gain a PS advantage.

(2) The upgrades that make Z-95s effective against the TIE swarm can also be applied to other ships.

So no, Z-95s are not anti-swarm tech. They do integrate very nicely with one of the game's existing pieces of anti-swarm tech--but that piece isn't unique to the Headhunter, Headhunters in general aren't uniquely proficient with it, and Headhunters without it aren't particularly effective at fighting swarms.

But you could easily have run the same 3-4 Assault Missiles in either faction before the Headhunter's release.

No you couldn't have, because of my point #1 that you missed: cost. Before the z-95 the cheapest options for an assault missile were the 22 point a-wing or the 21-point TIE bomber. That means 66-88 points or 63-84 points, respectively, for 3-4 assault missiles. IOW, if you take four assault missiles that's your entire list, and even three gives you very few options to do anything else. Z-95s with assault missiles cost 17 points, for 51-68 points total. And that's a much smaller commitment to make, leaving a lot more room for things that aren't your 3-4 assault missiles.

And then of course there's Blount, who gives you an automatic splash damage shot for 22 points, instead of spending 40-50 points (or more!) to consistently get at least one splash damage shot with a-wings or TIE bombers.

In short, what the z-95 has done is transform the assault missile from something you have to build your entire list around to something you can put in a generic list and still have room to bring conventional ships.

I've just completed a few battles using 3-12pt Zs and 3-12pt Ties. The Z wins pretty consistently (the higher PS is the difference). I played the Zs and used X-wing AI application to control the Ties.

I am wondering, if others are seeing the similar results.

I am pretty sure that the 8 Z vs 8 Tie (swarm vs swarm) will result in Z winning most of the times (due to the higher pilot skill) too. If this is the case, I can see the naked Z-swarm being more formidable than the 8-Tie Academy swarm. This in-turn makes the Z swarm more superior and perhaps the new swarm meta.

Could you tell me a lil more about this AI application you used to run the Imperial list??

Sure, you can find the AI app at http://xwing.runbam.com.s3-website-us-east-1.amazonaws.com/xwing_ai_1.7.0b2/index.htm

Something, I am ashamed to admit. In my experiments, I mentioned that I've play the Zs and let AI run the Ties and that the Zs would win alot. I also flip it around and let the AI run the Zs and I play the Ties. Guess what - the Zs (AI) would win fairly regularly (2/3 of the time). I am an Empire player and Tie swarm is my favorite meta.

You don't have to take my word, please try the experiment yourself. Use more ships if you have them. I like to hear your results.

You still think games on that thing mean anything to any end of any discussion?? Are you still "testing" with three ships?

But you could easily have run the same 3-4 Assault Missiles in either faction before the Headhunter's release.

No you couldn't have, because of my point #1 that you missed: cost. Before the z-95 the cheapest options for an assault missile were the 22 point a-wing or the 21-point TIE bomber. That means 66-88 points or 63-84 points, respectively, for 3-4 assault missiles. IOW, if you take four assault missiles that's your entire list, and even three gives you very few options to do anything else.

One example:

Captain Jonus (22)

Predator (3)

Assault Missiles (5)

Gamma Squadron Pilot (18)

Assault Missiles (5)

Cluster Missiles (4)

Gamma Squadron Pilot (18)

Assault Missiles (5)

Cluster Missiles (4)

"Backstabber" (16)

Total: 100

It's not perfect by any means, and the Assault Missiles aren't as effective as other choices if you're not facing a swarm/Biggs/ST chain, but it's not a bad list overall, and even against other kinds of lists that's still not a terribly attractive alpha strike to see coming your way.

Obviously I'm not unaware that Z-95s are the least expensive missile platform in the game, and 3x Tala Squadron + Assault Missiles makes for fairly nasty swarm-repellent while still leaving plenty of room in your list for other stuff. But (just like Blount) you could replace the Assault Missiles with Ion Pulse Missiles, and suddenly you have a list that's far better at board control but far less effective at taking apart a swarm. So clearly what's working against the swarm isn't the Z-95 chassis, but rather the missile.

Again, what I'm arguing about is the very strange (to me, anyway) notion that the Z-95 is a game element designed and introduced in order to take on swarms. It's a cheap platform for missiles, which means it's a cheap platform for Assault Missiles, and that opens up options that were, if not nonexistent, at least hard to access before Wave 4. But there's nothing in particular that makes the Z-95 good at Assault Missiles.

(Compare all this, by the way, to Predator. It doesn't demand to be used in conjunction with some other game element in order to be effective against swarms; almost regardless of what ship equips Predator, that ship is now drastically more effective against groups of low-PS ships--i.e., swarms.)

You still think games on that thing mean anything to any end of any discussion?? Are you still "testing" with three ships?

Yes, I currently have only 3-Z95. I like very much to extend my experiment to more Z95s soon. If you have the ships and would like to help in testing my theory, I would welcome it very much.

My experiments seemed to affirm MajorJuggler's jousting calculations for the Z95.

I only ordered 3 of them because originally I did not think much of them. Now I just might switch to the side of light.

Your tests with the AI program are not valid evidence in the topic at hand. Honestly you are probably hurting your play by engaging in these experiments.

Reasons for this.

3 TiEs and 3 X-95s is not representative of either ships actual usage. It isn't even representative of a real game. It's barely representative as an actual game state. The likelihood of 3 of each of those ships at full health approaching each other in formation is not going to happen in any game. Even in the unlikely event that both sides will be down to those specific ships, some are likely to be dinged up, they are also likely to be in a broken formation. The situation your are simulating is never going to happen.

The "opponent" your playing against has no way to actually implement strategy. Everything it does is inherently reactionary. It can not put forward a game plan and it can't adapt to a situation. Essentially it's a bad player that doesn't have a plan and can't adjust to a situation. This is especially true in the case of it using the TiE Fighters. The TiEs advantage is it's ability to block and barrel roll. Because your "opponent" isn't capable of planning ahead they are especially unable to utilize the advantages present. It can't do anything with asteroids either.

Look at how it dictates actions. It mandates a Barrel Roll if that will remove you from or bring an enemy ship into a firing arc; how does that work on a PS 1 ship without the ability to access board position and anticipate where a ship is going to move? If you can't gain a shot always Evade? Even if a Barrel Roll will put you in a better position for future turns? I could keep going.

Why did you need to confirm MajorJugglers jousting values? His math is sound. If you line up a few TiEs and Zs and roll off at each other the Zs will have a slight edge because of thier PS advantage. That isn't in dispute. But this game isn't played with stationary ships. Judging the situation by removing the advantages the TiEs posses (dial, blocking, arc dodging) is faulty logic

Your tests with the AI program are not valid evidence in the topic at hand.

Reasons for this.

3 TiEs and 3 X-95s is not representative of either ships actual usage. It isn't even representitive of a real game. It's barely representitive as an actual game state. The likelyhood of 3 of each of those ships at full health approaching each other in formation is not going to happen in any game. Even in the unlikely event that both sides will be down to those specefic ships, some are likely to be dinged up, they are also likely to be in a broken formation. The situation your are simulating is never going to happen.

The "opponent" your playing against has no way to actually implement strategy. Everything it does is inherently reactionary. It can not put forward a game plan and it can't adapt to a situation. Essentially it's a bad player that can't adjust. This is especially true in the case of it using the TiE Fighters. The TiEs advantage is it's ability to block and barrel roll. Because your "opponent" isn't capable of planning ahead they are especially unable to utilize the advantages present.

Why did you need to confirm MajorJugglers jousting values? His math is sound. If you line up a few TiEs and Zs and roll off at each other the Zs will have a slight edge because of thier PS advantage. That isn't in dispute. But this game isn't played with stationary ships. Judging the situation by removing the advantages the TiEs posses (dial, blocking, arc dodging) is faulty logic

I am aware of all these things. Therefore, this is just a theory. Notice, I also switched sides and when the AI can win against a human whom used blocking, dodging, flanking, etc. You can't help but take notice. Something is going on here. I am doing the best I can with what I have.

If you can do a human vs human experiment, I would really thank you. Please report your findings to me. If you like make a battle report.

It's not perfect by any means, and the Assault Missiles aren't as effective as other choices if you're not facing a swarm/Biggs/ST chain, but it's not a bad list overall, and even against other kinds of lists that's still not a terribly attractive alpha strike to see coming your way.

Yes, but the point is that it's a list that goes all-in on the missile alpha strike. You've got two missile carriers and a missile/buff ship, and all that you can do with your remaining points is a single TIE fighter. The z-95, on the other hand, allows you to take that anti-swarm threat while still having enough points left to buy additional ships.

And, more importantly, it's an imperial list. There was no (good) rebel list that could do what that list does until the z-95 arrived.

So clearly what's working against the swarm isn't the Z-95 chassis, but rather the missile.

The ship and the weapon are not entirely separate things. The missile provides the damage, the ship enables missile strategies that you couldn't use before wave 4. Take the z-95 away and assault missiles might as well not exist for rebels.

And the z-95 also gets the credit because it allows rebel lists to take an assault missile threat AND match the swarm's ship count.

But there's nothing in particular that makes the Z-95 good at Assault Missiles.

Again:

1) Cost. The z-95 allows you to bring a meaningful assault missile threat whithout spending so many points that you cripple the rest of your list. This makes assault missiles an option instead of a useless card that you'll never take.

2) Blount. Blount is by far the best assault missile platform in the game, and he's a z-95.

Blount is a Z-95, but not all Z-95s are Blount. His lone pilot ability is not in any way indicative of a ship-wide trend. Take Blount out of the picture and three Assault Missiles are still going to occupy a preponderance of your list (60 points is "all-in," but 50 isn't?). So, like Vorpal is saying, the Z-95 - as a ship - accomplishes nothing that couldn't be done before.

Let me see if I can make this easier to understand with a diagram:

iPeregrine is asserting a basic association fallacy, where A is Blount, B is the Z-95, and C is anti-swarm tech. Blount is both a Z-95 and anti-swarm tech, but notice how not all of B falls within the domain of C.

It's not theory if the methodology used is flawed from the start. It is just wishful thinking.

Cut the guy some slack.. Its not a definitive test but at least give the guy credit for attempting to test things out himself..

These forums seem to get more and more unfriendly as time goes on. Nobody here is perfect.

The best we can do as a community is create theories and test them as best as possible. They are not definitive but every little bit of information and testing provides a piece of a larger picture..

Not everyone is a math wiz that, through numbers, can provide flawless evidence. Some of us can only create a theory and do our best to present our findings to the community in hopes that it sparks new discussion.

God forbid if said theory goes against someone's opinion.. All hell breaks lose..