So, is the Decimator officially more powerful than the Falcon? It sure seems like it to me...

it's an interesting question, Ysanne will be better than C3PO once you've reached that level of damage. The problem being.. getting to that damage level without going to far past it before she triggers.

Would suck to loose your shielding than get hit with proton rockets when you still have full hull..

but overall it looks like the Decimator has the potential to take over the Falcons place.

Ysanne gives only one evade token, which is the same as what C3-PO can give. The difference is you can deny an agility die to turn off C3-PO, but stress effects affect Ysanne. They're pretty equivalent in my mind, but Ysanne costs one point more for some reason.

Because she's a guarantee not a gamble. if you run her with the PS6 pilot you get the 1 agility + evade.

Would suck to loose your shielding than get hit with proton rockets when you still have full hull..

One day, I'm going to hit a Decimator with APT + Jan or Oportunist or both after its lost some shields and land 6 criticals each flipping up a Direct Hit!

One day...

(Lose, btw. Pet peeve.)

Ysanne gives only one evade token, which is the same as what C3-PO can give. The difference is you can deny an agility die to turn off C3-PO, but stress effects affect Ysanne. They're pretty equivalent in my mind, but Ysanne costs one point more for some reason.

Because she's a guarantee not a gamble. if you run her with the PS6 pilot you get the 1 agility + evade.

I see that, but guessing 0 for C3-PO is a guaranteed evade also.

I'm also comparing the combos:

PS6 pilot + Ysanne (4 pts - not counting pilot)

Stressed = 0 evade guaranteed (1 agility)

Not Stressed = 1 evade guaranteed, plus can do another action (1 agility + evade)

Wedge/Outmaneuver = 1 evade guaranteed with action (0 agility + evade + 1 action)

C3PO + MF Title (4 pts)

Stressed = 1 evade guaranteed (1 agility => minimum 1)

Not Stressed = 2 evades guaranteed, but cannot do another action (unless have PTL or EI) (1 agility + evade)

Wedge/Outmaneuver = 1 evade guaranteed, but no other action (0 agility + evade)

So I guess in the stressed case C3-PO+MF Title is better. not stressed they're about equal, and against outmaneuver type skills Ysanne+Ps6 pilot is better.

Did I miss anything?

Kenkirk + Ysanne + Rebel captive = gross endgame potential.

First list i want to try:

Kenkirk

Ysanne

Rebel Captive

Gunner

Marksmanship

Dauntless

Jendon

Fire Control System

Gunner

Weapons Engineer

ST-321

The ship does not really look exceptional - it is very similar to the falcon, slightly on the worse side if you consider both of them naked. But what's really impressive with them is the fact that all its named pilots have unusually strong powers.

Chiranneau's power is one of the strongest in the game (it is very close to marksmanship without the 3-point cost, without taking the EPT slot, and without requiring an action !)

Commander Kenkirk's power adds a very significant boost to his ship's life time. And Oicunn's free damage when hitting sounds a big deal.

The ship does not really look exceptional - it is very similar to the falcon, slightly on the worse side if you consider both of them naked. But what's really impressive with them is the fact that all its named pilots have unusually strong powers.

Chiranneau's power is one of the strongest in the game (it is very close to marksmanship without the 3-point cost, without taking the EPT slot, and without requiring an action !)

Commander Kenkirk's power adds a very significant boost to his ship's life time. And Oicunn's free damage when hitting sounds a big deal.

I know huh? Finally some love for Imperials in terms of good named pilots. (after not so interesting Defender, Imperial Aces, and Bomber - besides Jonus - named pilots).

The ship does not really look exceptional - it is very similar to the falcon, slightly on the worse side if you consider both of them naked. But what's really impressive with them is the fact that all its named pilots have unusually strong powers.

Chiranneau's power is one of the strongest in the game (it is very close to marksmanship without the 3-point cost, without taking the EPT slot, and without requiring an action !)

Commander Kenkirk's power adds a very significant boost to his ship's life time. And Oicunn's free damage when hitting sounds a big deal.

I know huh? Finally some love for Imperials in terms of good named pilots. (after not so interesting Defender, Imperial Aces, and Bomber - besides Jonus - named pilots).

Since the Decimator is supposed to be commanded by an officer, rather than actually piloted by one, it makes sense that these named Decimators have great powers. One of the Empire's main strengths is in its officer and general command training, one would imagine.

Ysanne gives only one evade token, which is the same as what C3-PO can give. The difference is you can deny an agility die to turn off C3-PO, but stress effects affect Ysanne. They're pretty equivalent in my mind, but Ysanne costs one point more for some reason.

Because she's a guarantee not a gamble. if you run her with the PS6 pilot you get the 1 agility + evade.

I see that, but guessing 0 for C3-PO is a guaranteed evade also.

I'm also comparing the combos:

PS6 pilot + Ysanne (4 pts - not counting pilot)

Stressed = 0 evade guaranteed (1 agility)

Not Stressed = 1 evade guaranteed, plus can do another action (1 agility + evade)

Wedge/Outmaneuver = 1 evade guaranteed with action (0 agility + evade + 1 action)

C3PO + MF Title (4 pts)

Stressed = 1 evade guaranteed (1 agility => minimum 1)

Not Stressed = 2 evades guaranteed, but cannot do another action (unless have PTL or EI) (1 agility + evade)

Wedge/Outmaneuver = 1 evade guaranteed, but no other action (0 agility + evade)

So I guess in the stressed case C3-PO+MF Title is better. not stressed they're about equal, and against outmaneuver type skills Ysanne+Ps6 pilot is better.

Did I miss anything?

You're tacking onto 9-11 remaining hull, after already taking 5-7 damage. That's really really tanky.

Against 3 ship builds you're cutting their average damage down to around 5. That means it takes them 3 turns to kill one ship with things going relatively well. If things are ging poorly it's 4-5 turns of focuse fire on one ship. 3PO falcon is good. But so is the Icehard Kirk.

It's comparable to 3p0 and an evade, except for one thing.

You're tacking onto 9-11 remaining hull, after already taking 5-7 damage. That's really really tanky.

Against 3 ship builds you're cutting their average damage down to around 5. That means it takes them 3 turns to kill one ship with things going relatively well. If things are ging poorly it's 4-5 turns of focuse fire on one ship. 3PO falcon is good. But so is the Icehard Kirk.

Yeah, it does make sense now. Though C3P0 probably has an edge because it kicks in when the Falcon has 8 hull/5 shields, so has a little more survivability...

Intimidation might just make some people want to fly Arvel again.....

I was thinking that myself, especially with the boost the A-Wing is getting with Rebel Aces.

It's comparable to 3p0 and an evade, except for one thing.

You're tacking onto 9-11 remaining hull, after already taking 5-7 damage. That's really really tanky.

Against 3 ship builds you're cutting their average damage down to around 5. That means it takes them 3 turns to kill one ship with things going relatively well. If things are ging poorly it's 4-5 turns of focuse fire on one ship. 3PO falcon is good. But so is the Icehard Kirk.

Yeah, it does make sense now. Though C3P0 probably has an edge because it kicks in when the Falcon has 8 hull/5 shields, so has a little more survivability...

Not on Kirk.

Yes on the other pilots.

Kirk is already the most survivable pilot in the game(according to Juggler, who's math I trust.)

Tacking Iceheart on there adds 3p0 level survivability to a more durable ship.

3p0 is a better upgrade for the falcon. But Iceheart is a better upgrade for the Decimator.

In addition Stress isn't a huge factor as putting a Decimator into a position where it will be stressed at the beginning of the combat phase is a tough setup.(Requires multiple tacticians so far as I can tell.)

Oicunn's ability is pretty easy to understand. You execute a maneuver, which includes determining if you are overlapping and then pulling your ship back along the template until you fit. Any ship you are touching at that moment receives damage. The APL FAQ clears this up pretty nicely.

Out of all the expansions they've released, this is the one I've been the most excited about. I need the cards. All of them. In multiples.

Once again, I bring up this quote directly from the preview:

"After he executes a maneuver that causes his ship to overlap one or more enemy ships, each of those enemy ships he overlaps suffers one damage."

As written on the card, your interpretation seems correct. But the way FFG is explaining it here, that doesn't seem to be the case. And if it's NOT the way FFG is stating it (i.e. the way you're describing it) it's not as exciting to me than if it would cause damage to everything it would overlap.

In short, it's still too vague, at least for my tastes.

So 'Tactical Jammer' obstructs attacks... as in it functions like an asteroid with +1 defense dice or it completely blocks the attack?

It's an obstacle, so +1 defence die.

Isard could be really good on an imperial huge ship.

I like how all three configurations really lend themselves to completely different builds. Great design.

Having 3 named pilots for large ships makes me wish they did 3 named pilots and 2 generics for small based ships too. Then we might not be waiting so long for aces style boxes to improve some ships with lacklustre named pilots.

The description for Ruthlessness is really confusing.

Wave 5 looks awesome top to bottom.

Isard is definitely flying in some Firesprays soon.

The description for Ruthlessness is really confusing.

"After you perform an attack that hits..."

Pretty straight forward. We already know what being hit means thanks to stealth device.

"You must choose one other ship at range 1 of the defender (other than yourself)."

Again, nothing confusing there choose a ship at range 1 of the target, cannot be you or the target

"That ship suffers 1 damage"

Hard to get more straight forward than that.

Once again, I bring up this quote directly from the preview:

"After he executes a maneuver that causes his ship to overlap one or more enemy ships, each of those enemy ships he overlaps suffers one damage."

As written on the card, your interpretation seems correct. But the way FFG is explaining it here, that doesn't seem to be the case. And if it's NOT the way FFG is stating it (i.e. the way you're describing it) it's not as exciting to me than if it would cause damage to everything it would overlap.

In short, it's still too vague, at least for my tastes.

Ah, I see how that wording could make it look strange. But it is not the first time some words in their article were poorly chosen - whereas the text as written on the card is very specific.

I would say, don't hold your breath. Being able to bulldozer through 3+ ships at once for guaranteed damage seems... excessive, to understate it.

The description for Ruthlessness is really confusing.

How so?

"After you perform an attack that hits..."

Pretty straight forward. We already know what being hit means thanks to stealth device.

"You must choose one other ship at range 1 of the defender (other than yourself)."

Again, nothing confusing there choose a ship at range 1 of the target, cannot be you or the target

"That ship suffers 1 damage"

Hard to get more straight forward than that.

And yes, since it doesn't specify enemy ship, you must give that one damage to a friendly ship if one meets the qualifications and there aren't any enemy ships that do as well. I'm guessing this was the point of confusion?

It's comparable to 3p0 and an evade, except for one thing.

You're tacking onto 9-11 remaining hull, after already taking 5-7 damage. That's really really tanky.

Against 3 ship builds you're cutting their average damage down to around 5. That means it takes them 3 turns to kill one ship with things going relatively well. If things are ging poorly it's 4-5 turns of focuse fire on one ship. 3PO falcon is good. But so is the Icehard Kirk.

Yeah, it does make sense now. Though C3P0 probably has an edge because it kicks in when the Falcon has 8 hull/5 shields, so has a little more survivability...

Yes and no.

Not on Kirk.

Yes on the other pilots.

Kirk is already the most survivable pilot in the game(according to Juggler, who's math I trust.)

Tacking Iceheart on there adds 3p0 level survivability to a more durable ship.

3p0 is a better upgrade for the falcon. But Iceheart is a better upgrade for the Decimator.

In addition Stress isn't a huge factor as putting a Decimator into a position where it will be stressed at the beginning of the combat phase is a tough setup.(Requires multiple tacticians so far as I can tell.)

That's where I'm a little confused. Ysanne's & Kirk's ability only triggers when the Decimator reaches 9-11 HP, where the previous 5-7 HP have no agility at all. I think Juggler's math showed that the two are extremely close - (edit) without Ysanne or C3PO in the respective ships, and not counting the effect of stress and other situations.

He has yet to do the math for the tankiest build with crew, comparing YT-1300 with VT-49. I can't wait to see that!

OH! Great point about the "start of combat phase". That completely flew over my head.

I guess it just has to avoid double stress from shooting a Rebel Captive ship and a Mara Jade near by, but yeah, very limited things that can cause it stress at the beginning.

I'm glad that ability is a bit more useful than I thought it originally was, even though it prevents the Kirk build from using PtL, Fleet Officer, and other stress inducing upgrades during the activation phase. Probably worth it for sure.

Isard could be really good on an imperial huge ship.

I like how all three configurations really lend themselves to completely different builds. Great design.

Having 3 named pilots for large ships makes me wish they did 3 named pilots and 2 generics for small based ships too. Then we might not be waiting so long for aces style boxes to improve some ships with lacklustre named pilots.

The description for Ruthlessness is really confusing.

Wave 5 looks awesome top to bottom.

Must agree. I love the 3 different abilities and the completely different ships it'll build. I feel for the Falcon, while the 3 named pilots all have good skills, the builds usually end up about the same. The other ship that has different builds with the named pilots is the Lambda, granted, not all of the abilities are the greatest.

Isard is definitely flying in some Firesprays soon.

Or a 2 pt Moff filler as an insurance. I've had many times when the BH is ready to shoot and then gets a Blinded Pilot crit...

The description for Ruthlessness is really confusing.

How so?

"After you perform an attack that hits..."

Pretty straight forward. We already know what being hit means thanks to stealth device.

"You must choose one other ship at range 1 of the defender (other than yourself)."

Again, nothing confusing there choose a ship at range 1 of the target, cannot be you or the target

"That ship suffers 1 damage"

Hard to get more straight forward than that.

The description in the article, not the cards text. The article implies you can tack on the extra damage to the ship you were shooting at. Initially I thought it must have been worded like Fleet Officer and Jan, but it is not.

And care to lay off the condescension, there was no need for it.

Yes, their choice of words for explaining Ruthlesness was pretty bad, I had to go back and reread it to realize that he meant the damage was due to him attacking another ship near the one he rammed.

I am going to space Vader with the Moff, many times.

Oh the irony.

Oicunn's ability is pretty easy to understand. You execute a maneuver, which includes determining if you are overlapping and then pulling your ship back along the template until you fit. Any ship you are touching at that moment receives damage. The APL FAQ clears this up pretty nicely.

Out of all the expansions they've released, this is the one I've been the most excited about. I need the cards. All of them. In multiples.

Once again, I bring up this quote directly from the preview:

"After he executes a maneuver that causes his ship to overlap one or more enemy ships, each of those enemy ships he overlaps suffers one damage."

As written on the card, your interpretation seems correct. But the way FFG is explaining it here, that doesn't seem to be the case. And if it's NOT the way FFG is stating it (i.e. the way you're describing it) it's not as exciting to me than if it would cause damage to everything it would overlap.

In short, it's still too vague, at least for my tastes.

The articel actually says:

"After he executes a maneuver that causes his ship to overlap one or more enemy ships, each of those enemy ships he ends up touching suffers one damage."

Perhaps this has been edited after the mistake was found but the current wording is very clear.

Only enemy ships can be damaged, and only the ones you end up touching after you have moved your ship back along the movement template.