Having played several games it seems the Wave 1 meta should gravitate towards one of these three extremes:

No Fighters

Who needs Fighters when you've got Hull? No fighter builds trend towards two archetypes: Light and Heavy.

Heavy builds are the scariest and centre around three medium-class ships- Missions chosen will be Opening

Salvo, Contested Outpost, and Intel Sweep/Dangerous Territory. They aim to move full speed into the enemy

fleet and batter them dead using brute force.

Light builds emphasise mobility and finesse, with emphasis on objectives. Missions chosen will be Most Wanted, Hyperspace Assault and Superior Positions. Interestingly enough Heavy lists are a close match for Light lists since they can spread out and negate mobility with overlapping fire arcs, while the smaller ships have to attempt hit and run.

Imperial Death Wedge

VSD 1
VSD 1
VSD1
Gladiator 1 Admiral Motti - 299

Rebel School of Frigates

AFII B
AFII B
AFII B
Escort Frigate + Salvation
Gen Dodonna - 300

Strengths: Weight of numbers and firepower, high HP means you will never be tabled, small margin of error for opponents

Weakness: Bomber-centric lists, mobility missions

Imperial Gladiator Rush

Glad I + Advanced Concussion Missiles Engine Tech + Dominator
Glad I + Advanced Concussion Missiles
Glad I + Advanced Concussion Missiles
Glad I + Advanced Concussion Missiles
Admiral Screed - 296 Points

Rebel Corvette Swarm

Corvette A
Corvette A
Corvette A
Corvette A
Mon Mothma
Corvette B
Overload Pulse - 296 Points

Strengths: Fast and Precise

Weaknesses: Prone to player error, Fragile, Weakens significantly with each casualty

Full Squadron Complement

There's a reason squadrons are limited to 100 points; they can be absolute murder in large numbers. Squadron based builds are built around starfighters and supporting them with capital ships. Since the Most Wanted nerf to fighters missions chosen generally will be Precision Strike, Contested Outpost and Superior Positions. For Squadron-based lists to work they need to be able to 1) Clear opposing fighters quickly (1-2 turns) 2) Pose a threat to enemy Capitals.

Starfighter lists tend towards two types: Bomber and Superiority. Bomber lists rely on numbers and Flight Controllers to cripple enemy squadrons, whereas Superiority lists rely on Gallant Haven and Yavaris to protect and buff their fighters or combinations of Soontir + TIE Advanced to do so.

The problem with Squadron lists is that they telegraph your general movement and threat radius to your opponent from the position of your fighters, and the position of your supporting capital ships will be predictable.
They also require more mental planning in advance since they will not be able to catch up to fast ships running away.

Rebel Bomber Wing

AFII B ECM Hangar Flight Controller

Y-Wing
Y-Wing
Y-Wing
Y-Wing
Y-Wing

AFII B ECM Hangar Flight Controller Dodonna

Y-Wing
Y-Wing
Y-Wing
Y-Wing
Y-Wing - 300 points

Strengths: Alpha-strike potential

Weaknesses: Space superiority not guaranteed

Imperial Space Superiority

VSD I Expanded Hangars, Intelligence Agent

VSD 1 Expanded Hangars, Moff Tarkin

TIE Adv
TIE Adv
TIE Adv
TIE Adv
TIE Bomber
TIE Bomber
Rhymer
Soontir Fel - 296 points

Strengths: Strong fighter complement which still poses a threat to capital ships

Weaknesses: Limited capital ship range

Balanced lists

Straddling the middle will be lists with two to three ships and smaller fighter complements. Ships may be lightly or heavily upgraded and the fighter complement will be smaller. Combination of ships and fighters will correspond to the weaknesses of the list extremes above; Lists with more ships and fewer fighters will struggle against fighter heavy lists, while lists with fewer ships and more starfighters will have a disadvantage against lists with many capital ships.

It's an interesting read and you've given me some ideas but I think it's a bit early to say what is meta or make a call on archetypes

Why is it a bit early? You can look at options available and predict what will be effective and what will be sub-optimal.

The game is about killing enemy Capital Ships and achieving objectives.

There are two ways to do so: Massed firepower or gaining Space Superiority (which is a more roundabout way of getting to the first.) Starfighter battle is a big part but can be ignored completely if the opponent brings a weak Fighter complement or no bombers. Bombers trump lists which have no fighters, while lists which have no fighters do well against balanced lists by swamping the two ships with ships and hull.

Balanced lists which have sufficient fighter complements to stall bomber lists can pull out a win by tying up 1/3 of the list while their superior capitals work on the carriers which have to squadron command.

When it comes to Fighter on Fighter combat, Yavaris and Gallant Haven will beat most Imperial fighter groups but struggle with getting rushed by four Gladiators.

One archetype of list has a clear advantage over another. It's Rock/Paper/Saber/Ysalamiri/Jedi.

it is too early

we can predict quite a bit, but only if we're ready to abandon certain preconceptions when they inevitably collapse on the table

I will add from practice:

Rhymer + Chiraneau > Gallant Haven in the sense that it forces your squadrons away from their hidey hole

also, Gallant Haven is stupid absurd. I love it

I've tried balancing lists utilizing X and A wings with Frigates. Aside from player ineptitude on my part, there still seems to be issues with that Escort Frigate.

Then again, I am not a competitive player. I figure the more a play, the better off I will be. I do need to get a second Assault Frigate though. I also think that fighters really are a key component in the game.

I wholly believe the problems with Nebs are 100% player dependent

They definitely were in my experiences

fortunately, fatties are far easier to play well

Yeah. I realized on turn 0 I set up wrong. Lamented it vocally the whole game. It was just a bad game all the way around for me. I promised my friend a better challenge next week.

Why to early? Play testing

Also I don't see this game being about ships/lists it's about objectives and strategies. You only have 6 rounds to win and you need to think about how you will do that. And I think a lot of games will be decided by the first 2 round if you plan your moves right. The idea of thinking this will beat that is point less IMO because unless you have good strategy your opponent is going to hand you your hat and show you the door

Strategy is what I think will win games not lists/meta

I could be wrong only time will tell

Fun fact. The Escort Frigate should never EVER be on the inside track against a VSD and a Gladiator. God what a horror show that was. Lesson learned.

I think it is a good start. Your Archetypes mostly mesh with my thoughts. Although as archetypes they are somewhat more generic than what you have. Three ships with high hull values, Two ships with high hull values and squadrons, Mixed medium and small ships (with or without squadrons) and then nothing but lights.

The one aspect of all of this, which I think is important is the choice of being first player or second. In some instances I think you have Fleets that may well benefit for being first player, but the fleet total of 296 may make this problematic. Perhaps 4 points is more towards your comfort zone, but I feel I would be inclined to go about 1 Squadrons points value or so if I felt it imperative to have the mission selection and first play.

I think the real trouble is, it is too early.

Not to predict what the metagame archetypes could be, but to narrow them down to a point where you can reasonably expect to play against a given archetype in enough games as to gain an advantage from this.

My best guess would be to plan to play Assault Frigates and Gladiators. For simply no better reason than they are the new toys.

You're hinting at a rock paper scissors setup which I find interesting.

Bomber heavy lists > ship heavy lists

Mixed lists > bomber heavy lists

Ship heavy lists > mixed lists

Interesting but I feel like it will play out far differently on the tabletop although I feel like a highly specialized list will be able to more easily make use of its strengths.

I also think (hope) that the rock paper scissors effect won't really kick in because there is enough variance in how you can deploy and play and strategize.

If we end up with a few archetypes (there always will be) invariably some archetypes will be able to more easily take apart other archetypes.

I just think (hope) that there's enough variance in the way we can play that a bomber heavy list, for example, can shift tactics enough or has enough options to never have to go "oh no you brought my counter, a mixed list, I'm already at a disadvantage, I'll play for a draw"

I'm exhausted from playing two events this weekend and writing an extremely lengthy write up, but I'll throw this in.

-No fighters doesn't work unless it's small fast ships that can outpace your ships so your squadron can't get dials due to being out of range (CR-90). Imperials can't pull it off in a tournament setting because as soon as they come up against Rhymer or ANY Rebel list that's squadron heavy it's game over. AA dice on ships doesn't cut it.

-VSDI's are meh without Screed. The extra health is nice, but you NEED to win the damage race.

-Multiple Gladiators is bad. Actually any Gladiator that doesn't have Demolisher is bad. A competent opponent won't end up in close range and will kill you on approach. It's also really hard to get multiple arcs without the title and one attack from a Gladiator isn't especially scary.

-You're on the right track with squadrons, but Y-Wings are probably the worst for Rebels. Heavy is a huge limitation, B-Wings and A-Wings are far better.


EDIT: It's not too early to be doing this. My play group had been playtesting 300 by proxy for over a month before it dropped. I won the event yesterday and got second at the one today, and all because I played about 20 proxy games before hand.

I ran 2 AF2A's and Escort Redemption Leia as a "Just in case" build recently, and if you stay at speed 3, you don't need to worry about TIE bombers that much. Triggered Leia once when I done goofed with an AF, but I could of saved the points for an initiative bid I think.

Also, Mon Mothma and evades (with ECM's) tends to hard-counter Screed and Screedy combos. We found that out by accident actually, did not plan for it XD.

So it is kinda like a Fatty list, because it doesn't have fighters, just 3 ships with 2 anti-squadron dice each. But it also has a Neb-B, so it's not THAT tanky...

Also, Mon Mothma and evades (with ECM's) tends to hard-counter Screed

THIS. Sweet Jesus she's annoying, though I still think Dodonna is better (cheaper, utility)

So this has been a concern of mine but also since squadrons can't recover damage do you think squadrons will become the missiles and torpedoes for armada?

They heal a point by landing on the station.

They heal a point by landing on the station.

So the station is like the big one asteroid.

squadrons are infinitely better than x-wing torps because they're reusable

they're not one and done unless they die, torps are just one and done no matter how little impact they had

Also, Mon Mothma and evades (with ECM's) tends to hard-counter Screed

THIS. Sweet Jesus she's annoying, though I still think Dodonna is better (cheaper, utility)

Yeah, deffinatly expensive (44 points for me in total) but allows combo shutdown 90% of the time. However, is giving 2 af2 a's that worth it? I dunno, but in a limited turn game you can delay damage cards touching you for long enough to pull a win. Or you could take a whole 'nother corvette...

Dodonna might be better, however i need to playtest my annoying duel whales some more with mon mothma.

Careful, that guy who hates the word meta is going to be here any minute...

Careful, that guy who hates the word meta is going to be here any minute...

meta....meta...meta

Careful, that guy who hates the word meta is going to be here any minute...

meta....meta...meta

Honestly, going zero fighters seems wrong to me.

Even 3 squadrons of blockers can utterly hose an enemy fighter build for enough turns as to matter. Just 33 points of A-Wings can stop Rhymer's squadron dead in it's tracks for the crucial turns to stop an alpha strike from wrecking your ships. Same with a similar number of Tie-Ints or just plain Tie Fighters.

T/As even are durable enough to require two attacks minimum to bring down.

I also think it is too early to say. there is a huge difference between a prediction and actual practice. some things which may look good while you are staring at cards fall completely apart on the table. the "meta" takes time to evolve, and, like natural selection, tends to shape itself over lots and lots of games. what does not work repeatedly gets phased out, and combinations that are powerful see more and more play. If you can figure all that out in a game with this many possible combinations, then you are beyond genius.

What this seems more like is - here are the broad possibilities. I can run a few big ships, more little ships, lots of fighters, no fighters, or somewhere in between. I think that about covers it, but I'd be hard put to call that any kind of prediction, more like stating the obvious. not trying to be snide, but wave 1 has been out less than 1 week, it's a little early to be talking about a "meta" of any kind at this point.

Honestly, going zero fighters seems wrong to me.

Even 3 squadrons of blockers can utterly hose an enemy fighter build for enough turns as to matter. Just 33 points of A-Wings can stop Rhymer's squadron dead in it's tracks for the crucial turns to stop an alpha strike from wrecking your ships. Same with a similar number of Tie-Ints or just plain Tie Fighters.

T/As even are durable enough to require two attacks minimum to bring down.

I agree. fighters, don't leave home without them.