A lot of people are hoping for the TIE Avenger. As an old X-wing vs TIE Fighter addict, I'd love to see it. But my understanding was always that the Defender was the better of the two:

TIE Defender

4 Lasers

2 Ion cannons

Secondaries

Beam Weapon

TIE Avenger

4 Lasers

Secondaries

Beam Weapon

Now FFG went 3/3/3/3 for the Defender and made the ion cannons an add on through the cannon slot, just as they did with the Y-wing which typically is thought to have the ion turret stock. Likewise people want to fix the TIE Advanced -- a far rarer ship in the lore than the TIE Avenger which actually made it pass the prototype stage. So here are my questions:

1) Which is the superior fighter, TIE Defender or TIE Avenger? Why?

2) What do people want the TIE Avenger to be in the game [states, dial, actions]? What is the difference between it/and its role vs. the Defenders?

3) If you want the Advanced fixed, what role does it play between these three?

Good answers will include proposed stats for the Avenger and their idea of how the Advanced should be buffed. Explain the difference between all these to me people!

Segnar's loop as a move opens up some interesting options, and I can see them on the TIE Avenger.

The TIE Defender I think should be the superior ship. The White K-turn is unparalleled, but it suffers a lot in making hard turns. I think the Avenger can be closer to a conventional dial with better turns, a normal red K-turn stress, or perhaps switching out the normal K-turn for red Segnar's loops. I think low-speed moves should be difficult for the Avenger but at high speeds, the ship should excel. Avengers were fast. Boost, Barrel Roll, focus, and I can almost imagine skipping evades.

For balance though I can picture making the Avenger 3/2 or 2/2. The Avenger wasn't known for its robustness, just the sheer speed and being super nimble. Part of the reason the Tractor Beam was developed wasn't just to stop defenders, but Avengers as well.

In the end I'm thinking 3/3/2/2, or 3/3/2/3 like the E-Wing. An eclectic dial that rewards fast movement, not so great on knife-fighting. Missiles at least as an upgrade, higher pilots come with EPTs. Focus, Barrel Roll, Boost, Target Lock... test to see if it's too fragile without an evade. Were I designing it I'd create a new beam weapon to use with it and the Assault Gunboat to make them distinct from the Interceptor and Defender.

I think there are a few options you could consider for the TIE Advanced, but they'd need to be titles or ship-specific modifications. I find it a little hard to believe it's going to come anywhere but in an aces pack potentially, since the only Imperial large ship candidate I can think of is the Gozanti. Which should come with TIEs.

Optimally, FFG could craft a TIE Avenger pack with some cards that are designed to be backwards comptatible with the Aadvanced. Maybe cherry picking some of the starfighter cannon names from the Decipher game and saying, "TIE Advanced, TIE Defender, and TIE Avenger only" to, say, auto-convert a focus into a hit when shooting a primary. Or allowing a crit-conversion if a hit goes through.

1) Defender. I'm not entirely convinced that it turned as poorly in canon as it does in the game - the red turns at 1 and 2 feel a bit like balancing rationalizations rather than sticking with the established descriptions. Not that I'm complaining too much (though I would have liked the Defender, rather than the Phantom, to have been the meta-screwing terror of Wave 4), since it makes it an entertaining challenge to fly, rather than the bandaid to hit weak lists with.

Back to the question - why is it superior - better weaponry, better speed, better maneuverability, better aesthetics.

The one thing I'd say an Avenger has over the Defender, especially in terms of Imperial philosophy, is that it's cheaper. It's still excruciatingly expensive compared to the Ties and Interceptors, and it still values the life of the pilot way too much , but I think it fits a bit better.

2 and 3) I would like to see the Avenger as a title for the Advanced, relatively cheap, merely increasing the attack dice by one (to match the four laser cannons of the Interceptor and Avenger share in design). I think that would be a significant balancing mechanic. It then becomes a much more affordable version of the Defender, or a slightly more expensive but reasonably competitive alternative to the Interceptor - a less glassy cannon, or a less agile bruiser, depending on how you think of it.

I'm opposed to an avenger title simply because I'd rather see a new sculpt for the better fighter. Saying the TIE avenger should be a title is like saying Z-95s should have titles to turn them into X-Wings, or vice versa.

And I'd rather see the TIE Avenger stand out from the TIE Advanced, not making the Avenger impossible by just calling it a title.

And I'd rather see the TIE Avenger stand out from the TIE Advanced, not making the Avenger impossible by just calling it a title.

I agree, the TIE Avenger was a DIFFERENT ship. Certainly they look similar in many ways but they should not be further confused by simply adding a title to the Advanced or, worse, by fixing the Advanced by turning it into an Avenger.

As for the Advanced fix, people keep mentioning it as a bonus in an Imperial Huge pack. This is a HORRIBLE idea because it effectively costs the Advanced buff a Huge level purchase. Not all Imperial players play Epic or want to pay $60+ for a fix. It needs to be cheaply availible. The best solution would be like the Most Wanted pack where it comes included in an Imperial pack that that readily appeals to Imperial players on its own accord. You could solve both problems by releasing a TIE Avenger and including with it 2 copies of a TIE Advanced buff or title card. You know the same people who want to fix the Advanced would want Avengers. You'd get both products out, a distinct Avenger miniature, tacitly acknowledge the similarities, provide an extra buff so Advanced customers don't need to get more Avengers than they need, and save people money. Boom. Win, win.

For balance though I can picture making the Avenger 3/2 or 2/2. The Avenger wasn't known for its robustness, just the sheer speed and being super nimble. Part of the reason the Tractor Beam was developed wasn't just to stop defenders, but Avengers as well.

In the end I'm thinking 3/3/2/2, or 3/3/2/3 like the E-Wing. An eclectic dial that rewards fast movement, not so great on knife-fighting. Missiles at least as an upgrade, higher pilots come with EPTs. Focus, Barrel Roll, Boost, Target Lock... test to see if it's too fragile without an evade. Were I designing it I'd create a new beam weapon to use with it and the Assault Gunboat to make them distinct from the Interceptor and Defender.

I could see the Avenger looking somewhat like an Imperial A-wing, but with 3 attack and including target lock. When flying an Avenger, Rebel A-wings and Imp Defenders were the only ships that ever gave me pause. Yes, it shouldn't be very robust either though. Solid hits took it apart. It was a poor knife-fighter, it was so fast you flew it constantly riding the break. Overshoot a target and you got potentially dangerous pot shots up the rear. So I like the idea of it having a fast dial and no evades. This only reinforces my idea of it as the Imperial A-wing. I actually like the idea of it not having an evade in exchange for a lot greens to reflect it not being very robust but, by that logic, the A-wing shouldn't have evades either. More greens but no 1 movements?

Tie Avenger had twice the shields of an X-wing, and actually less armour than the X1. So 3-3-2-3 is spot on.

I don't think asking which is better is the right question. The question should be which is better at what role. The Defender was much more rugged and had more ordnance and ion cannons. It is heavy fighter or assault fighter with a more diverse mission capability.

The Avenger was not as robust, but was more nimble, much smaller, and had better fields of vision. It was a space superiority ship, meant to defeat other fighters to allow other craft to operate.

Fluff wise, Maarek Stele preferred the Avenger. He even kept his when the 181st changed to Defenders.

Game wise I would expect segnor turns. I also agree that it's low speed turns should be red as greater speed causes a much wider turn radius.

Another TIE Avenger thread! I have a habit of posting in these.

There were two versions of the TIE Defender: the original version in the TIE Fighter PC game, and a toned-down (nerfed) version whose stats were referenced (but not always playable) in X-wing Alliance, and X-Wing vs. TIE Fighter.

Here is a comparison of key stats between the X-wing, TIE Fighter, TIE Interceptor, TIE Avenger, TIE Defender (original) and TIE Defender (nerfed). I hope this helps clear up any confusion and common misconceptions.

Hull: RU

Shields: SBD

Maneuverability: DPF

Speed: MGLT

Ship | RU | SBD | DPF | MGLT

X-wing | 20 | 50 | 75 | 100

TIE Fighter | 15 | 0 | 100 | 100

TIE Advanced x1 | ?? | ?? | ?? | 105

TIE Interceptor | 20 | 0 | 125 | 111

TIE Avenger | 20 | 100 | 150 | 145

TIE Defender (nerfed) | 20 | 100 | 110 | 144

TIE Defender (original) | 20 | 200 | 155 | 175

An exacto knife and glue (or shapeways) gets you an avenger. I might be able to get on board with it as the imperial awing but it would just outclass the interceptor in that role. It leaves no room for the advanced (a much more recognizable and asthetically pleasing ship) to improve, and comes in feeling a lot like a maneuverable defender with less HP (you know, an interceptor).

It doesn't really have a place unless it gets the loop and they decide to go with beam weapons.

It would be a ship that just looks like a combo of 2 existing ships and combines stats of 2 existing ships. I don't see a place for it, and would prefer to see tie droid, tie predator, and a few other ships way before it.

I'm still amazed that the Defender costs more points than a Phantom. Even considering the need for ACD.

I'm still amazed that the Defender costs more points than a Phantom. Even considering the need for ACD.

I've never had a phantom equipped cost less than a defender, you fly echo or whisper without upgrades they wont do alot.

And i struggle to think when id ever take a generic phantom but i use the generic defender alot.

The Avenger was faster and more agile than any other TIE ship. Give it a red Segnor's Loop, a white K-Turn, and everything else green except maybe the 1-distance maneuvers and/or 3 turns which could be white. Stats should be 3/3/2/2, and it should cost similar to a Defender. This puts it on par with a Defender in terms of power while giving it less health and more maneuverability to balance it out. It also keeps it more expensive than an Advanced and with slightly less health so that it doesn't invalidate using that ship.

As for ways they can tweak the Advanced, I'd like to see a System upgrade icon given to it somehow. That would open up some options that most other TIEs don't have access to.

Not that I'd complain about a separate Avenger fighter, but I think saying that making the Avenger a title to the Advanced is like making the X-Wing a title to the Headhunter doesn't really work. Yes, the X-Wing (EU-wise) was developed from the Headhunter by the same company, but different design team at least 20 years later, and the Avenger was developed by the same team within, as far as I can tell, a 1-5 year period. It does look different - but maybe I just care more about X-Wings than about the Advanced/Avenger difference, but I would be very happy to fly Marek Steele in an Avenger-titled Tie Advanced.

The Avenger was faster and more agile than any other TIE ship. Give it a red Segnor's Loop, a white K-Turn, and everything else green except maybe the 1-distance maneuvers and/or 3 turns which could be white. Stats should be 3/3/2/2, and it should cost similar to a Defender. This puts it on par with a Defender in terms of power while giving it less health and more maneuverability to balance it out. It also keeps it more expensive than an Advanced and with slightly less health so that it doesn't invalidate using that ship.

As for ways they can tweak the Advanced, I'd like to see a System upgrade icon given to it somehow. That would open up some options that most other TIEs don't have access to.

More agile perhaps defender was faster.

Not that I'd complain about a separate Avenger fighter, but I think saying that making the Avenger a title to the Advanced is like making the X-Wing a title to the Headhunter doesn't really work. Yes, the X-Wing (EU-wise) was developed from the Headhunter by the same company, but different design team at least 20 years later, and the Avenger was developed by the same team within, as far as I can tell, a 1-5 year period. It does look different - but maybe I just care more about X-Wings than about the Advanced/Avenger difference, but I would be very happy to fly Marek Steele in an Avenger-titled Tie Advanced.

TIE/x1 -> TIE Advanced

TIE/x2 -> TIE Avenger

TIE/x3 -> TIE Interceptor

TIE/Ad x7 -> TIE Defender

The Avenger is as much as separate ship as the Interceptor or Defender are. Giving the Advanced a title and calling it an Avenger would be a disservice.

More agile perhaps defender was faster.

Maybe if you power down some systems. A fully powered Defender couldn't keep up with a fully powered Avenger.

A lot of people are hoping for the TIE Avenger. As an old X-wing vs TIE Fighter addict, I'd love to see it. But my understanding was always that the Defender was the better of the two:

TIE Defender

4 Lasers

2 Ion cannons

Secondaries

Beam Weapon

TIE Avenger

4 Lasers

Secondaries

Beam Weapon

Now FFG went 3/3/3/3 for the Defender and made the ion cannons an add on through the cannon slot, just as they did with the Y-wing which typically is thought to have the ion turret stock. Likewise people want to fix the TIE Advanced -- a far rarer ship in the lore than the TIE Avenger which actually made it pass the prototype stage. So here are my questions:

1) Which is the superior fighter, TIE Defender or TIE Avenger? Why?

2) What do people want the TIE Avenger to be in the game [states, dial, actions]? What is the difference between it/and its role vs. the Defenders?

3) If you want the Advanced fixed, what role does it play between these three?

Good answers will include proposed stats for the Avenger and their idea of how the Advanced should be buffed. Explain the difference between all these to me people!

1) Its hard to say which is better they got hyper lethal firepower, defender is superior in just about every other attribute except size. TIE Defenders are huge targets but the y also have a blind spot 6 oclock high. The few ships that are dangerous to Defenders are Avengers, A-Wings, and Interceptors. I dont know if they fought or not but I would guess that E-Wings could be a good counter maybe.

When you get down to it after looking over there strengths and weaknesses you find that the answer is "I am Groot."

2) I want the Avenger to be a hyper TIE Interceptor BUT with the drawback that it could die even faster.

I would like to see it with the stats 3/4/2/1 or 3/4/1/1 or 3/3/2/1 I would like to see the Avenger use Torps instead of missiles we dont have any IMP dog fighters that can carry torps... I think it should come with a new manuver like a "loop" Lets you move forward 2 - 5 or more and after firing you move backwards 1 - 3 . To be clear when doing the loop you move forward 2 and after attacking backwards 1. Or you move forward 3 and after firing backwards 2, you get the idea.

The dial should be like the Interceptors but with a couple more whites like the 1 and 2 turns and banks.

TIE/x1 -> TIE Advanced

TIE/x2 -> TIE Avenger

TIE/x3 -> TIE Interceptor

TIE/Ad x7 -> TIE Defender

The Avenger is as much as separate ship as the Interceptor or Defender are. Giving the Advanced a title and calling it an Avenger would be a disservice.

The X1 is the TIE Advanced the X2 was the avenger prototype but I would consider it inferior because it didnt have a hyper drive. Most the X3 Interceptor prototypes where inferior to the mainstream version. The ones tested by elite squadrons looked great because they put the reactor to the test by tossing on alot of the stuff youd see on a avenger. Cant tell if there any beater than the trickedout versions used by Avenger squadron and others likem. Cant say anything about the X7.

A lot of people are hoping for the TIE Avenger. As an old X-wing vs TIE Fighter addict, I'd love to see it. But my understanding was always that the Defender was the better of the two:

TIE Defender

4 Lasers

2 Ion cannons

Secondaries

Beam Weapon

TIE Avenger

4 Lasers

Secondaries

Beam Weapon

Now FFG went 3/3/3/3 for the Defender and made the ion cannons an add on through the cannon slot, just as they did with the Y-wing which typically is thought to have the ion turret stock. Likewise people want to fix the TIE Advanced -- a far rarer ship in the lore than the TIE Avenger which actually made it pass the prototype stage. So here are my questions:

1) Which is the superior fighter, TIE Defender or TIE Avenger? Why?

2) What do people want the TIE Avenger to be in the game [states, dial, actions]? What is the difference between it/and its role vs. the Defenders?

3) If you want the Advanced fixed, what role does it play between these three?

Good answers will include proposed stats for the Avenger and their idea of how the Advanced should be buffed. Explain the difference between all these to me people!

1) Its hard to say which is better they got hyper lethal firepower, defender is superior in just about every other attribute except size. TIE Defenders are huge targets but the y also have a blind spot 6 oclock high. The few ships that are dangerous to Defenders are Avengers, A-Wings, and Interceptors. I dont know if they fought or not but I would guess that E-Wings could be a good counter maybe.

When you get down to it after looking over there strengths and weaknesses you find that the answer is "I am Groot."

2) I want the Avenger to be a hyper TIE Interceptor BUT with the drawback that it could die even faster.

I would like to see it with the stats 3/4/2/1 or 3/4/1/1 or 3/3/2/1 I would like to see the Avenger use Torps instead of missiles we dont have any IMP dog fighters that can carry torps... I think it should come with a new manuver like a "loop" Lets you move forward 2 - 5 or more and after firing you move backwards 1 - 3 . To be clear when doing the loop you move forward 2 and after attacking backwards 1. Or you move forward 3 and after firing backwards 2, you get the idea.

The dial should be like the Interceptors but with a couple more whites like the 1 and 2 turns and banks.

This is the complete opposite of what the Avenger was. Why shoehorn it into a role it doesn't belong in?

The Avenger had twice the shields of an X-Wing. How does that make it more fragile than an Interceptor?

The days when imp fighters had to be more fragile than the rebels are over, there's no reason the avenger has to be fragile.

Swap missiles for torps give it a dial that's better at tight turns than the defender but lacks its superior k turn and green moves, it can't carry a cannon but maybe it could have a sensor slot.

3332 is the logical stat line.

This is the complete opposite of what the Avenger was. Why shoehorn it into a role it doesn't belong in?

The Avenger had twice the shields of an X-Wing. How does that make it more fragile than an Interceptor?

Its designation in Star Wars TIE FIGHTER was Space Superiority fighter / Interceptor.

I feel Its defensive dice represent its shields(deflection without major loss in strength) , manuverability, ecm, size of craft, and other counter measures. Having the defence Dice at a natural 4 I think reps the Avenger very well.

The days when imp fighters had to be more fragile than the rebels are over, there's no reason the avenger has to be fragile.

Swap missiles for torps give it a dial that's better at tight turns than the defender but lacks its superior k turn and green moves, it can't carry a cannon but maybe it could have a sensor slot.

3332 is the logical stat line.

Pretty much this. But I'd also find a way to give it a beam weapon.

I'm also opposed to the 'Avenger title'.

First, because as many people said, the Avenger deserves its own miniature model.

Second, because if you use the 'Avenger title' as a bandaid to fix the advanced, then, you deprive the ship from its original identity. Everyone that wished to fly an Advanced would auto-include the title ir order to make it 'playable' or 'acceptable'. Thus, technically no one would fly 'Advanceds' anymore... Everyone would fly 'Avengers'.

If the Avenger deserves its own sculpt, the Advanced also deserves its own, personal fix... Not being artificially trasformed into another ship. And if you insist in using a title to fix the advanced, you can just use the 'Advanced X2' designation, which is indeed the improved version of the original prototype.

I still think another attack die is what the TIE advanced needs, (possibly equipped in its missile slot?) Question is, for how much?

If you're still around Juggler, given their very similar dials, how much would an extra attack die need to cost to bring the Jousting Efficiency of the TIE advanced in line with the X-wing?

Here is my take: People are only asking for the Avenger as a title, because they don't want their Advanced sitting on their shelves and growing dust. If they fix the advanced, people will not want the Avenger title for it any longer.

Since it's over costed now: Normally I would rate +1 attack and a systems slot at 4 pts, so well give it to them for 2 points and make it choice

Title: Tie Avenger

Tie Advanced only (No Vader)

+1 Attack or Systems Slot

2 pts.

Ship gains +1 attack or Systems Slot

Why is poor Vader shafted?