Sorry to go off topic 
But would a base HWK with an AB turret and Saboteur be a semi viable option? The range 1 restriction on both the card and turret could help each other out somewhat. the mobility is obv super low, but it could be devastating to those who get in the R1 bubble.
Sorry to go off topic
But would a base HWK with an AB turret and Saboteur be a semi viable option? The range 1 restriction on both the card and turret could help each other out somewhat. the mobility is obv super low, but it could be devastating to those who get in the R1 bubble.
You're doing more against those you work against, rather than trying to work against more foes.
Sorry to go off topic
But would a base HWK with an AB turret and Saboteur be a semi viable option? The range 1 restriction on both the card and turret could help each other out somewhat. the mobility is obv super low, but it could be devastating to those who get in the R1 bubble.
Staying out of range 1 of a HWK is surprisingly easy.
And the high-agility targets that really fear AB turret are generally equipped with good dials and repositioning abilities, so they'll probably never get caught at range 1.
If you want to run AB turret, try 4 scum Y-Wings with Unhinged Astromech 
You're doing more against those you work against, rather than trying to work against more foes.Sorry to go off topic
But would a base HWK with an AB turret and Saboteur be a semi viable option? The range 1 restriction on both the card and turret could help each other out somewhat. the mobility is obv super low, but it could be devastating to those who get in the R1 bubble.
Not sure I quite understand your wording. Are you saying I shouldn't waste the 20 pts? Because I know it's a waste, I'm just trying to work it into a squad without wasting a crew slot on a ship who needs it more.
Sorry to go off topic
But would a base HWK with an AB turret and Saboteur be a semi viable option? The range 1 restriction on both the card and turret could help each other out somewhat. the mobility is obv super low, but it could be devastating to those who get in the R1 bubble.
Staying out of range 1 of a HWK is surprisingly easy.
And the high-agility targets that really fear AB turret are generally equipped with good dials and repositioning abilities, so they'll probably never get caught at range 1.
If you want to run AB turret, try 4 scum Y-Wings with Unhinged Astromech
I agree with everything you said, and I have flown the 4 Ys to some success. But like we all do I'm sure, I always try and find weird and funky squads on the 'builder and work in cards that otherwise wouldn't be acceptable in this Meta. I wouldn't dare fly this in a competitive environment
You're doing more against those you work against, rather than trying to work against more foes.Sorry to go off topic
But would a base HWK with an AB turret and Saboteur be a semi viable option? The range 1 restriction on both the card and turret could help each other out somewhat. the mobility is obv super low, but it could be devastating to those who get in the R1 bubble.
Not sure I quite understand your wording. Are you saying I shouldn't waste the 20 pts? Because I know it's a waste, I'm just trying to work it into a squad without wasting a crew slot on a ship who needs it more.
That's part of the problem with Saboteur, there's always a better crew that could be filling that slot.
Oicunn with Dauntless, Determination, Moff Jerjerrod, Intel Agent, and Saboteur is about as close as you'll get to Saboteur being worth the slot, but only if you end up airlocking him to fix a crit early.
That's part of the problem with Saboteur, there's always a better crew that could be filling that slot.
Oicunn with Dauntless, Determination, Moff Jerjerrod, Intel Agent, and Saboteur is about as close as you'll get to Saboteur being worth the slot, but only if you end up airlocking him to fix a crit early.
Hehe. Best use of Saboteur is not to use his ability but to sacrifice him.
Although even then, Mercenary Co-Pilot or Tactician are probably better options...
I think the real question we should be asking is, "If you optimistically assume 100% success, is Saboteur ever worth it?"
And I think the answer to that is no. But let's go through the crit deck and brute force our way to that conclusion.
In the standard deck is:
Blinded Pilot
Console Fire
Damaged Cockpit
Damaged Engine
Damaged Sensor Array
Direct Hit
Injured Pilot
Minor Explosion
Minor Hull Breach
Munitions Failure
Structural Damage
Stunned Pilot
Thrust Control Fire
Weapon Malfunction
You are 2.5x more likely to draw a Direct Hit than any other crit.
Of the crits, the ones that may have no effect are:
-Injured Pilot on generics with no EPT/on anyone with a Pilot Skill that will not trigger often
-Damaged Cockpit, if your ships are already higher PS than the opponent
-Console Fire, 62.5% of the time.
-Minor Hull Breach, 62.5% of the time, if the opponent chooses a red maneuver.
-Munitions Failure, if there are no secondary weapons on the opponent.
-Structural Damage on a Decimator lol
-Stunned Pilot when the opponent can avoid all overlaps
-Weapon Malfunction on an Outrider-equipped YT-2400, or any other ship with secondary weapons firing in place of the primary weapon
And some increasingly more exotic examples.
The cards that are worthwhile to flip up once and only once (because they stay faceup, barring in some cases R5 Astromech):
-Damaged Cockpit (can be useless)
-Damaged Engine (makes turns red [lol TIE Defender])
-Direct Hit (adds 1 damage)
-Injured Pilot (can be useless)
-Minor Hull Breach (can be useless)
-Stunned Pilot (can be useless)
The cards that are worthwhile to flip up multiple times:
-Blinded Pilot (removes attack dice from next attack)
-Console Fire (triggers 37.5% for 1 additional damage, takes an action to flip facedown)
-Damaged Sensor Array (eliminates action bar actions, takes an action to flip facedown at 37.5%)
-Minor Explosion (gives a damage at 37.5%)
-Munitions Failure (only if your opponent has more than 1 secondary weapon)
-Structural Damage (reduces agility by 1, which can be quite good. Takes an action at 37.5% success rate to flip facedown)
-Thrust Control Fire (gives a stress and then flips facedown-- the best control facet of Saboteur)
-Weapon Malfunction (cuts primary attack by 1 which can be solid, takes an action at 50% success to flip facedown)
The good news for a guaranteed Saboteur is that using it multiple times is rarely without consequence in terms of reducing the efficiency of a ship. More good news is that, of 33 cards, 16 are worth flipping multiple times. 14 if you don't consider Munitions Failure, which can be useless quite often and honestly seldom more than once. That's roughly half the deck that makes a 2 point card worth using if you assume that 50% = 100%. Which is true, for large values of 50%.
The other half of the deck can only be flipped one time. And most of those cards have instances of uselessness. At around 25% of the time, you cause the recipient 1 additional damage (but then he doesn't draw another card for that, so you have multiple rounds, possibly, where Saboteur is not usable against that target). Was more damage what you wanted? You were probably better off to spend your action on modifying your attack.
Saboteur's utility is not, as you may have expected, to do damage. Saboteur is good (if he triggers 100%) to play the mental/control game with your opponent. The permanent crits are unlikely to cause damage, but they do force your opponent to avoid certain maneuvers and positions to avoid the penalties. The non-permanent crits may cause damage (at a low rate of success), but more often-- because your opponent wants to avoid the penalty-- they will cause him to use his action step on removing the crit. Sometimes (Thrust Control Fire) they could be used, if your opponent has planned a red maneuver, to stress him before he uses it and assign him a totally different maneuver. Or to assign another stress to an already-stressed ship.
Saboteur, if he works, works in the same way obstacles do: albeit obstacles that affect only one side.
Is Saboteur, even if he works at 100%, ever worth it?
The answer to that question is not a solid no, as I expected at the beginning of this investigation. The answer really is, "it depends".
There are times when it can work.
If your intent is to do damage, you're most likely better off just picking an action that gives you attack modifications.
If your intent is action denial and board control, then Saboteur is a good choice for cheap. It faces competition from Tactician in the "2 point control crew" gameplay area, however. If we remove the 100% optimism and say 50% trigger, using an action, with a facedown damage card already assigned to the target, and Range 1, versus Tactician's no action, Range 2 in-arc-only restrictions, we can say with confidence that Saboteur provides a more versatile effect, as it should, because it fulfills more stringent conditions. Tactician provides a more reliable, albeit more vanilla, effect.
As is the case with any 2-point upgrade, you're not well-suited to tailor an entire list towards triggering its effect. It's just not powerful enough on a broad scale to do that. And there are better, more reliable methods of generating the control effect. So it's not a solid no, but it can also never be a solid yes.
If an updated damage deck that has relevant effects for more ships is released, this could change. And THAT, I think, is the most telling thing about Saboteur.
The answer to the question, "Does _______ breathe new life into Saboteur?" is only a solid 'yes' when '_______' is 'a different Damage deck'.
I think the real question we should be asking is, "If you optimistically assume 100% success, is Saboteur ever worth it?"
**snip**
The answer to the question, "Does _______ breathe new life into Saboteur?" is only a solid 'yes' when '_______' is 'a different Damage deck'.
The way I'd phrase this is dealing with Critical Vulnerability: If the defending ship has a greater-than-normal issue with certain crits, then the ship is more vulnerable to crits.
Classically, Critical Vulnerability as I conceive it also applies to how likely the defending ship is to receive critical damage, as opposed to normal damage (facedown or shield).
However, Sabby renders this statistic less likely; he drastically improves the critical vulnerability of ships with low agility.
After I get back from the appointment I'm heading to now, I'll start writing up an actual topic on this concept, like my recent Mitigation post.
As I work until 10 pm tonight, I'm unlikely to finish the post in its entirety until tomorrow.