Does anyone else feel this way? When you step back and look at a pure ship-build and go, "Really need some X-Wings or TIEs or Y-Wings.." It feels wrong for Imperials not to have some TIE squadrons out there, or Rebels not to fly with some escorts...

Points-wise, we all want the best build possible. I mean, I just suggested a no-fighter rebel build in another thread; yet I also thought "man that will look silly without some X or A Wings..."

Who else tends to try to fit some fighters in, if only for the 'feels right'?

(Personally I feel fighter compliment should be a base of # of basic X or TIEs by default with a capital ship capable of carrying them.)

As I tried the 3 VSDs, I justified not having a fighterscreen to myself with: "They are just clearing this nuisance en route, deploying the fighters would be too time consuming." But yes, it feels terribly wrong, especially when your opponent uses them...

Oh yeah. Has there ever been a battle between capital ships that didn't have fighters deployed?

It's alright, as I've discussed in other threads it's pretty bad in practice

Yes, but that was before hyperdrive-capable fighters between capitals without hangars far away from planetary reserves....

When building a fleet I always have the same problem. If I have the ships I want, I can't never afford fighters, if I drop one ship then I have more points than I need for fighters :/

Perhaps you should go lighter on upgrades?

the scale of the game seems far more vast with these teeny little fly swarms of fighters buzzing around the table, making capital ships seem mammoth sized in comparison (as they should be )

but, ito gameplay, the contribution of squadrons is significant enough to warrant inclusion with or without how awesome they make the game look

Scale isn't the issue, nor upgrade. I'm saying it looks wrong from a logic-standpoint not to have fighter escort.

Any time I build a list that will 100% work without fighters - I just feel a need to willingly hinder my list's capabilities for the sole purpose of putting in some X or Y Wings. Because they should be there in any 'real' sense.

I could imagine a little swarm of cR90 blockade runners going zooooooooooooooooooooooooooommmmmmmmmmmmm without any of the slower squadrons holding them back

but agreed, it really screws with you when you see squadron-less Star Destroyers

I would say it is strange to see Imperials running without TIEs (considering even the GSD had a fairly large hanger). Rebels are more understandable, early on they were spread thin and sometimes fleets would be caught without a fighter escort (or have only have a few Y-Wings and X-Wings).

It does feel wrong without fighters. And I trust the designers enough to have done their due diligence in balancing everything so that no figher lists will be punished. I have seen someone alpha strike a Neb on turn 2 with four ties and strip all the shields off the front. Think of doing that with bombers.

I would say it is strange to see Imperials running without TIEs (considering even the GSD had a fairly large hanger). Rebels are more understandable, early on they were spread thin and sometimes fleets would be caught without a fighter escort (or have only have a few Y-Wings and X-Wings).

Thematically, I agree - Rebels wouldn't have too many fighters so running fighter-less is somewhat feasible. However gameplay-wise, their squadrons are just too good to NOT run at least a few. Even just a smattering (official navy term) of A-wings can ruin the best laid plans of a Rhymer list. Plus that black die can put the hurt on a shieldless Vic.

maybe I just need to write a post on how cool A-wings are....

I would say it is strange to see Imperials running without TIEs (considering even the GSD had a fairly large hanger). Rebels are more understandable, early on they were spread thin and sometimes fleets would be caught without a fighter escort (or have only have a few Y-Wings and X-Wings).

Thematically, I agree - Rebels wouldn't have too many fighters so running fighter-less is somewhat feasible. However gameplay-wise, their squadrons are just too good to NOT run at least a few. Even just a smattering (official navy term) of A-wings can ruin the best laid plans of a Rhymer list. Plus that black die can put the hurt on a shieldless Vic.

maybe I just need to write a post on how cool A-wings are....

God yes, A-Wings are great... just need to be cautious with Fel. If you engage Fel with A's you need at least 2 squadrons.

Plus that black die can put the hurt on a shieldless Vic.

maybe I just need to write a post on how cool A-wings are....

Well, it has a 3/4 chance of dealing 1 damage, as it is no bomber. And yes, please write an analysis of the A-Wing.

As a Rebel player who builds fighter heavy list, I want to encourage my Imperial friends to keep leaving their TIEs at home.

Fighters aren't really necessary for some builds which use brute force. You'll only be hard-countered by dedicated bomber lists if you run 3vsd 1 Glad or 2VSD 2 GLAD.

Even running 2-3 squadrons is just wasted points against most space superiority lists as they will get wiped in a single turn.

As a Rebel player who builds fighter heavy list, I want to encourage my Imperial friends to keep leaving their TIEs at home.

Then break out the Y-Wings. Nothing says "I need a fighter screen" like three waves of bombers.

My first 300 point game I was playing my rebels and planning on focusing on my fighters.

THen my opponent who was pressed for time used three VSDs, sat them in the corner of the deployment zone for two turns.... no fighters. It was left up to my 6 squadrons to take out a VSD, which they were unable to do in 4 rounds. So next time I am either going to go 2 Assualt frigates, or a bunch of Y-wings, and some X-wings escort for Cap

Almost think you should have 1 or 2 squadrons per ship to make it tourny legal.

I don't think we will see that much squadronless builds now as wave 1 (and especially the squadron boxes) are out there. A bunch of unchecked Y-Wings munches those SDs for Breakfast, as such, there is no need for a must-include-squadrons-ruling. I would have found a difference between hyperjump capable and uncapable squadrons interesting, though. Perhaps on how to deploy or a maximum number of uncapable squadrons per ship (depending on the regarding ship, of course).

I tend to think about big heavy fleet forces. I'm so focused on overloading the Star Destroyers that the few fighters I have end up as afterthoughts. When I face against enemy fighters I'm usually regretting it...

I think I could get away without a fighter escort only if I was sure my capital ships could punch out the enemy capital ships quickly. If I'm able to destroy every big ship he has fielded before the fighters finish me, then my job is done.

Does it feel wrong to not have torpedoes or missiles in X-wing?

IMHO I think squadrons maw be under-powered for their point cost. Why take 2 squadrons when you can grab another big ship?

If you are going to take no, or almost no fighters. I think it is necessary to take ships with decent ant-fighter capabilities. I have played a few games with a 2x GSD II and 1x VSD I list which doesn't leave much room for fighters, 3 or 4 squads depending on the type and what upgrades I take on the ships. The GSD II's however do a fair amount of work, particularly "Demolisher". Several times if I am unable to get in black dice range I have used it's ability to take two separate shots on the same group of fighters. Four blue dice against a group of fighters will start to thin the herd very quickly and I think is a better use of the ship than one or two red dice potshots.

I think it seems like fighters don't do much in a lot of games because they are mostly used to cancel each other out. Most of the tactics I have seen and used revolve around jockeying to see who will get the jump with a squadron command and thin the other guys squads. I think focusing more on trying to get fighters in among the enemy ships and avoiding squadrons will be an interesting strategy to try.

While that is true, I still stand by my point that this was more aesthetics. The game just looks weird without fighters... fleets look empty...

As I tried the 3 VSDs, I justified not having a fighterscreen to myself with: "They are just clearing this nuisance en route, deploying the fighters would be too time consuming." But yes, it feels terribly wrong, especially when your opponent uses them...

That makes me queasy just thinking about it. VSDs have such lousy anti-fighter batteries.