I'm not too worried about skews because usually if someone bought the 5 corvettes or 3+ glads, it would have just been more cost effective for them to buy the kit off ebay....

Skews aren't what I want out of the game so I wont play them. I am sure 4 gladiators are fun to play and that's great, its just not for me. I like the visuals of the fighters and the ships working together.

Skews...lol

I bought four Gladiators. They are FFG models. I will likely buy a fifth when we go to 400, because: awesome.

if you want to counter haven, don't take out demolisher

the way to counter haven is to hit haven, because she doesn't work on herself

damaging haven either kills it (Yay) or forces it to **** off and concede its title bonuses.

currently, fatties are the only rebel ship that you can trade demolisher for and come out ahead.

I also currently think rebs are in a better, more flexible position than imps. Corvs and Nebs take a little bit to learn, but they and the fatties are all exceptionally flexible and potent whereas I feel the Glad is pretty unimpressive without either title + techs. The VSD is a brick but it also turns like one and I haven't had the chance to see if Warlord turns it into a long range monster or doesn't help it not lose long range engagements with rebels. The carrier (FC and hangars) and Dominator (obvious build) have both been ridiculously effective in my engagements against them, however.

the only problem right now is that we might want to devolve into group-think and it is way too early in the game's lifespan for that

It is also my experience that we're going to see far more imperial players than rebs for a bit, at least going off my local group. Why?

yeah, who would you rather be?

Why trade demolisher?

That situation assumes that once demolisher has shot, return fire can threaten to kill it. Demolisher is a flanker. Trouble is, a lot of folks try demolisher where the other ship(s) is a lone VSD. That VSD's position is too predictable, and it cannot stay away from an AF. The VSD becomes an anchor to the demolisher.

If, instead, the demolisher is in a fleet with 2-3 other glads, the other GSDs can dictate where the enemy has to go (or rather make it too painful to go certain places) and better enable the demolisher to run in from the side where the enemy cannot mass shots on it after it kills what it runs up to.

That also best works when demolisher moves last and you are 1st player. Dem engine techs up as the last ship, shoots, shoots again both arcs at the start of next turn, flies away. But to do that requires enough ships to be first player and also ensure the demolisher moves up last and that number is not 2...

because Demolisher's cost < Gallant Haven's cost

simple as that

if the situation arises where you can suicide the demolisher for haven, it is in your advantage to do so especially because it opens up rebel fighters for mass slaughter by FC squadrons. Of course keeping it alive is ideal, but not always possible.

also, I disagree. the carrier VSD has been far more flexible and impactful against my fatties than additional gladiators, which are usually just bloats of points imo. Being able to hurl rhymer and anti-squadron ties at incredible speeds gives the empire access to long range superiority that the rebels generally have by default. Fatties have no reason to drive directly towards GSDs because they strafe so well, to the point where I'm really only concerned about Demolisher or a very well flown Insidious both with techs and initiative. The damage GSDs deal is unreal, but they are accordingly limited to very short range.

because Demolisher's cost < Gallant Haven's cost

simple as that

if the situation arises where you can suicide the demolisher for haven, it is in your advantage to do so especially because it opens up rebel fighters for mass slaughter by FC squadrons. Of course keeping it alive is ideal, but not always possible.

also, I disagree. the carrier VSD has been far more flexible and impactful against my fatties than additional gladiators, which are usually just bloats of points imo. Being able to hurl rhymer and anti-squadron ties at incredible speeds gives the empire access to long range superiority that the rebels generally have by default. Fatties have no reason to drive directly towards GSDs because they strafe so well, to the point where I'm really only concerned about Demolisher or a very well flown Insidious both with techs and initiative. The damage GSDs deal is unreal, but they are accordingly limited to very short range.

Someone gets it......

People knock the VSDs but they are great carriers. You want to really next level someone. Get the VSD to the center of the board and drop it to speed 0........ they cant resist and if it has been ignored it will survive a turn or 2 drawing all fire away from your demolisher. This happened to me by accident due to speed reducing effects on crits, but my demolisher killed all 3 of their ships as they got wide eye'd for a 0 speed VSD. Risky...yes, ballsy....yes, hella funny.....of course.

I am not saying a triple Glad list wont work, it will. I have seen it do well first hand. The person playing it also went 6-4 6-4 9-1 in the event due to losing 2 or 3 glads. His 9-1 game, his opponents dice left him and he failed to kill a crippled gladiator and then lost his last ship. This is the same downside to motti and mon motha. you sacrifice offense for defense. In a game that rewards you for tabling your opponent and not loosing anything in return, taking out a ship and tanking through their counter attacks wont get you high in the placings if you are trying to win some swag. Its a great way to play the game, and if the game was simply about wins/loses, play until their is one undefeated player, i bet you see more motti and motha builds. Right now its all about the attack and the offense, theirs a reason why screed and dodonna are favorites over the other admirals, and why assault concussion missiles are a must have, they increase damage output. Look at a rebel fleet with 2 frigates with electronic counter measures + salvation neb + mon motha. like I get 8 engineering tokens with a dial and token, good luck killing me. That list will constantly 6-4 opponents but if someone gets a 10-0 your most likely out of the race for first place.

I think that is one view. One I do not share, but it is a view.

The whole point of my all GSD fleet is not just to win, but to win with enough MoV to win the whole thing. Who makes fleets to draw?

Making the fleet is only about 30% of winning, IMO. You have to fly it. Someone else's results with a given fleet are meaningless without knowing the person, their skill and the skills of their opponents. Someone 10-0s a couple of new players in a small tournament is not only not something to use to build a fleet around, it is likely highly misleading.

A VSD is actually an easier kill for an all GSD than an AF. It does not have ECM and its position is far more predictable. The carrier version even better because that player gave up shooty/defensive upgrades to make his squadrons better at shooting at fighters I do not have.

I think that is one view. One I do not share, but it is a view.

The whole point of my all GSD fleet is not just to win, but to win with enough MoV to win the whole thing. Who makes fleets to draw?

Making the fleet is only about 30% of winning, IMO. You have to fly it. Someone else's results with a given fleet are meaningless without knowing the person, their skill and the skills of their opponents. Someone 10-0s a couple of new players in a small tournament is not only not something to use to build a fleet around, it is likely highly misleading.

A VSD is actually an easier kill for an all GSD than an AF. It does not have ECM and its position is far more predictable. The carrier version even better because that player gave up shooty/defensive upgrades to make his squadrons better at shooting at fighters I do not have.

except for enemy rhymer bombers, who are going to love playing around in the space your fighters would be occupying if you had them

his ability also works on non-bombers, and while howlie + interceptors are easily the worst squadron for anti-ship you can't threaten them at all. OP's squadrons represent an additional 3-4 damage coming in on top of what rhymer contributes, and a chunck of points you won't ever be getting. At that point, whether or not 3 glads can run down the opponent before they go down is up to the players.

not to say one variant is "better" than another (too vague a term), but I do believe GSD + carrier VSD is the more flexible variant especially when fatties get involved. I don't like skews in general, though.

Full disclosure: I reject the term 'skews' in this context as silly and irrelevant. As always, YMMV.

Yeah, when I first started out with all GSD I was concerned that the free squadron shots would be a problem. On paper it can sound horrifying: six or so free black/other dice shooting at me a turn, harder to avoid if rhymer in charge. But that is on paper.

the reality is - if you have 3-4 GSDs, you do not need all of them to win big and they move around like no one's business. So, the reality is, the other guy has to guess where you are going to be and try and put them in your path or commit to commanding squadrons (which means less shooty/repair for him). Typically they want to try and guess where demolisher is going to be. Ok, fine. Either I have what I want with the other three or I screwed up and really need demolisher no matter the risk and he has positioned them perfectly.

But hey, that is Rhymer, Howl, 2 Ints and 2 Advanced (my favorite set), so 1 black bomber die and 2black/three blue. Produces about 3 hits on average. But I ended my turn there, and was out of range before I moved. So, my opponent is Nimitz the squadron master and puts Rhymer and the kids in exactly the right spot. I swoop in and demolish-shot the target. He shoots his squadrons and gets three hits on me. I am alive still...lol

Next turn starts, I shoot the target with two arcs of 9 dice (2red/7 black) and skate away well out of fight range. Not many ships can take the 5 black then 2 red/7 black and live, certainly not the nebulon I am normally killing with that. But in any case, the fighters are back there out of position to shoot at that same target again.

Last night I blew through the shots from Luke, Wedge, Dutch and a Y to kill a neb and fly away. I live to do it again!

not to say one variant is "better" than another (too vague a term), but I do believe GSD + carrier VSD is the more flexible variant especially when fatties get involved. I don't like skews in general, though.

this is clearly how i feel as well. in the grand scope of things, i feel i can take my original list to any 300pt lvl event right now and do well with it. are their some weaknesses sure but i feel confident enough in it and my ability to power through and even if i take a loss, get some tournament points from it.

Serious question for Fickle and Burger – what do you guys consider skew lists? (My wargaming background is not in FFG games, it’s not a term I have heard used outside these forums). I understand a 100% capital build falls into this category for you guys, but where is the line? E.g. would Mon Mothma + five CR90b’s + 75 points of fighters be a skew, or is that a balanced list (albeit very light on upgrades)? Personally I would consider the five CR90’s less of a skew than two utterly tricked out combo-crazy gladiators + all the elite pilots, but I think it’s just different people’s expectations of what a ‘normal list’ should be.

I really disagree about Mon Mothma’s defence leading to reduced damage……..now I have only played one game with her, but she kept the CR90’s on the table much longer than Dodonna does……and this allowed them to keep firing, thus dealing out more damage. In the last game (the battle report in this forum) the two CR90b’s threw out 26 dice targeting capitals in three turns, it was Mon Mothma that kept them alive long enough to do this. Personally I would rather have an extra (small) pile of attack dice over a choice couple of crits.

Losing a ship isn’t a big deal if you’re playing to wipe the enemy capitals out, we only need 151 MOV for a 10:0 (they haven’t changed this yet have they?) 151 MOV really isn’t that much, there should be several ways to get this – one way would be a tanky conservative fleet that’s going to kill one enemy ship and all their squadrons while trying to lose next to nothing in return. Another way would be to go for a blood bath, wipe the enemy out and just deal with any loses (the quad gladiator could lose two gladiators and still get a 10:0).

I don’t think that either of us are saying two ship builds are rubbish….just that we disagree that “the only viable swarm is the CR90 swarm”. From what I have seen so far/have read on the forums here it looks like a huge variety of builds are viable, each with their own little group of champions and tournament winners. That’s a fantastic place to be in so long as we don’t descend into an argument about what is THE best, and what THE answer is.

Played tonight 4 GSD I with no squadrons vs Mothma rebels with 90+ points in squadrons. Won without loss, even with three enemy squadrons producing 5 hits in one turn. Its true that James is a less experienced player. But - his squadrons produced as much or more damage as can reasonably be expected no matter ones experience level. Trouble is, with 4 GSD, no one of them has to stay around and if one is in trouble - as one of them was - it can be gone before more shooting can be brought to bear against it still leaving three ships to fight the enemy. In this case, that GSD was brought to within 2 damage of dying, but moved away at 4 behind another GSD after delivering 9 dice of shooting at the enemy.

Fun fact: if you have 4 ships and he has 3 and you kill 1: the next turn's activations are you, him, you, him, you, you. Sweet...

Using 'skew' as a pejorative term is petulant. Jus' sayin'

Serious question for Fickle and Burger – what do you guys consider skew lists? (My wargaming background is not in FFG games, it’s not a term I have heard used outside these forums). I understand a 100% capital build falls into this category for you guys, but where is the line? E.g. would Mon Mothma + five CR90b’s + 75 points of fighters be a skew, or is that a balanced list (albeit very light on upgrades)? Personally I would consider the five CR90’s less of a skew than two utterly tricked out combo-crazy gladiators + all the elite pilots, but I think it’s just different people’s expectations of what a ‘normal list’ should be.

I really disagree about Mon Mothma’s defence leading to reduced damage……..now I have only played one game with her, but she kept the CR90’s on the table much longer than Dodonna does……and this allowed them to keep firing, thus dealing out more damage. In the last game (the battle report in this forum) the two CR90b’s threw out 26 dice targeting capitals in three turns, it was Mon Mothma that kept them alive long enough to do this. Personally I would rather have an extra (small) pile of attack dice over a choice couple of crits.

Losing a ship isn’t a big deal if you’re playing to wipe the enemy capitals out, we only need 151 MOV for a 10:0 (they haven’t changed this yet have they?) 151 MOV really isn’t that much, there should be several ways to get this – one way would be a tanky conservative fleet that’s going to kill one enemy ship and all their squadrons while trying to lose next to nothing in return. Another way would be to go for a blood bath, wipe the enemy out and just deal with any loses (the quad gladiator could lose two gladiators and still get a 10:0).

I don’t think that either of us are saying two ship builds are rubbish….just that we disagree that “the only viable swarm is the CR90 swarm”. From what I have seen so far/have read on the forums here it looks like a huge variety of builds are viable, each with their own little group of champions and tournament winners. That’s a fantastic place to be in so long as we don’t descend into an argument about what is THE best, and what THE answer is.

I come from warmachine so a skew is a list that stacks one thing very well (armor, defense, guns, incorporeal) you sacrifice balance to try and put yourself in a situation where they can not handle your list. this works in WM as its a 2 list environment. I use this theory for armada. a list that is all ships and little squadrons to me is a skew. or a list that is all the same ship is a skew. each ship does different things. while 2-3 GSDs may be very strong, a VSD brings some balance to the force and lets you avoid losing to a list that's the rock to your scissors.

i am exploring more lists, albeit mostly rebels since ive pretty much played imps from the get go. Its also a money factor. I still play other games and with a new WM book and releases coming, buying 2 more Glads and 3 more c90s isn't an option.

That is well said.

What I might take issue with, for the purposes of discussion, is the idea of conflating balance with variety. I find my all GSD fleets to be very balanced - in that I have given myself what I think is an answer for everything I might encounter. What I do not have is a bunch of different things, but that is not the same as balance.

For example, I do not have squadrons. But I do have an *answer* for enemy squadrons. Its just that my answer to them is not fighting them with other squadrons. My answer to them is to reduce the contact time between my ships and his squadrons to an ineffective amount and to make use of the fact that any points he has spent on anti-squadron combat is completely wasted.

Look at Wedge/Dutch (or our version: Soontir/Advanced/Howl). If I had squadrons, those two fighters would come in, hit me, toggle my slider and then hit me again with 6 dice, likely killing any squadron they face - maybe two - in one turn. Highly effective. Shooting ships they will likely produce a couple hits. And that only if they are commanded. And whatever other cards spent to help them - Gallant Haven, Flight Controllers, etc - do nothing to me.

I don't think I would ever take anything that is likely near useless against a number of likely opponents and call it 'balanced'.

Now, X-wings commanded consistently? slightly more scary. But then it is on me to make my opponent pay for taking squadron dials and not concentrate fire and to have the discipline to move the GSD on which the X wings focus out of the battle.

I tend to shy away from swiss army knife lists. Its a personal character flaw, but I hate looking at that corkscrew when my opponent has no wine bottle...

i can see that. Ive seen squadrons just do so much work for me and my opponents I personally dont want to go squadron light. Sure they are dicey but all of a sudden you've lost a shield zone and their ship has a firing solution on that shield. it gets rough. I also squadron way more due to rhymer to give myself 1 black and 3 blue dice to attack with instead of just 1 more attack on the salvo. situation-ally better but in early phases of the game its much better.

Yes, we agree on that. Rhymer changes that equation dramatically.

I think the way to go if one takes squadrons, and I have many lists that include them, is to build to shoot ships with them and force the enemy squadrons to you. That way, if the enemy has none, at least yours are specifically designed to get the most out of ship shots for the points.

you don't really need to maximize anti-ship when taking squadrons for the off-chance your enemy won't have any. If your opponent is giving you free reign by not packing any anti-squadron firepower, even tie fighters will be able to recklessly fly in and pick apart ships or protect your own cap ships like a swarm of angry blue dice flies.

what happens if you take nothing but bombers is that you'll run into someone who has squadrons who will happily proceed to render those bombers useless.

rebs have an easier time achieving a good balance because the humble X and A wings are both quite solid at engaging either enemy type and escort frigates are currently the cheapest source of 2 blue dice available (raider may change that if the black die isn't unduly limiting). Imps are more specialized, with only Advance really approaching the flexibility of rebel fighters (or tie fighters if you count raw numbers on top of their horrible anti-ship die)

I was not suggesting that.

I was suggesting a squadron build that was able to reliably attack ships *IF* the enemy allowed it. Given that even a wings and advanceds have black ship dice, what that really means is being able to command them and not have that hurt too much. I have seen too many players try to rely on the 'I won't squadron command them and just put them in the way of his ships and shoot them in the squadron phase.' Its *that* that does not work.

oh aye

that's only ever worked on VSDs for me

It’s interesting how different people think isn’t it. I’m sort of with Perakkir in that I like the flexibility of the build on the table above all else rather than the diversity of the components in the build. Having said that I love having a Swiss army knife - I like to have more component options rather than combo’s (my background is primarily in Warhammer Fantasy where I often ignore lord choices and even magic in order to take more units). This manifests itself in Armada as me getting sad if I don’t have at least three capitals and fighters and bombers (or fighters with black dice) all in the same fleet.

Burger – I had a game against your fleet the other day, and have a battle report in the forums (currently on the second page), any chance of getting some thoughts on how my opponent used your fleet?

Burger – I had a game against your fleet the other day, and have a battle report in the forums (currently on the second page), any chance of getting some thoughts on how my opponent used your fleet?

Not really. Its hard to tell without watching a video. It does seem like if he was second player, he miss-deployed the mines. If you go to about 3.5 on the range ruler starting at the edge of the play area East to West, and do a O M M O M M O M M O deployment you force your opponent to either take obstruction damage or take mines to the face. it really forces them out into the 12x3 areas outside the play area which makes their deployments very telegraphed.

What was his deployment order? was is Vic, squadrons x4, glad? if not he deployed his gladiator too early. its one of the main reasons to have 8 squadrons, you typically win deployment, letting you place your gladiator for optimal efficiency.

I have been finding there are three types of builds that seem to be common where I am:

1. The "balanced" build at the beginning of this post, often with 1 large cap and then a bevy of support built to work with it.
2. The heavy fighters/bombers build, with at least one ship designed as a super-carrier (Gallant Haven, VSD).
3. The much more rare no/light fighters build with capital ship spam.

The other thing I have found is that the third archetype works much, much better for rebels. The current list I have been running (and consistently winning with) has zero squadrons. However, all but one of my capital ships rock 2 blue dice for anti-squadron, and what I have been finding for rebels is this:

1. As your ships are much faster than imperials, if they go fighter or bomber heavy, you either want to be rolling at maximum speed so that they realistically need squadron commands in order to hit your ships for more than 1 turn or you want to go very slowly but bunch up the anti-squadron fire so that they take 6+ blue dice on the way in before getting to shoot at any of your stuff.
2. Lists that took any real investment in space superiority have dead points, as those fighters just don't do enough to capital ships that can return fire effectively to justify their points, and sending them in often means losing them without finishing off ships, giving the rebel player a points advantage.
3. This actually turns the wide side arcs of the Neb B into an advantage at times, as swinging the side of a Neb B around often means you can fire 2 blue dice at every single ship in an entire fighter swarm, and many of the combos that squadrons are currently built for (Fel + Vader, etc.) are irrelevant to a ship firing upon them.

I don't think this will work as well for Imperials, barring perhaps the all 2-blue dice gladiator list, as part of what makes it tick is the combination of everything at speed 3+ requiring the enemy to use squadron commands to hit you effectively (so that you can't just park a squadron, shoot, get hit by the slow moving ship and get dragged or have it barely pass you, then shoot again without moving) and wide arcs with anti-ship fire meaning getting squadrons close to the formation is probably reducing the lifespan of your fighters/bombers to 1-2 turns max.

Has anyone else been trying this? As, right now, this has seemed like a very strong tactic in our group, as the only flight group that has survived it is the Gallant Haven crew, but the fleet itself packs enough firepower to just blow up the Haven instead.

I have been finding there are three types of builds that seem to be common where I am:

1. The "balanced" build at the beginning of this post, often with 1 large cap and then a bevy of support built to work with it.
2. The heavy fighters/bombers build, with at least one ship designed as a super-carrier (Gallant Haven, VSD).
3. The much more rare no/light fighters build with capital ship spam.

The other thing I have found is that the third archetype works much, much better for rebels. The current list I have been running (and consistently winning with) has zero squadrons. However, all but one of my capital ships rock 2 blue dice for anti-squadron, and what I have been finding for rebels is this:

1. As your ships are much faster than imperials, if they go fighter or bomber heavy, you either want to be rolling at maximum speed so that they realistically need squadron commands in order to hit your ships for more than 1 turn or you want to go very slowly but bunch up the anti-squadron fire so that they take 6+ blue dice on the way in before getting to shoot at any of your stuff.
2. Lists that took any real investment in space superiority have dead points, as those fighters just don't do enough to capital ships that can return fire effectively to justify their points, and sending them in often means losing them without finishing off ships, giving the rebel player a points advantage.
3. This actually turns the wide side arcs of the Neb B into an advantage at times, as swinging the side of a Neb B around often means you can fire 2 blue dice at every single ship in an entire fighter swarm, and many of the combos that squadrons are currently built for (Fel + Vader, etc.) are irrelevant to a ship firing upon them.

I don't think this will work as well for Imperials, barring perhaps the all 2-blue dice gladiator list, as part of what makes it tick is the combination of everything at speed 3+ requiring the enemy to use squadron commands to hit you effectively (so that you can't just park a squadron, shoot, get hit by the slow moving ship and get dragged or have it barely pass you, then shoot again without moving) and wide arcs with anti-ship fire meaning getting squadrons close to the formation is probably reducing the lifespan of your fighters/bombers to 1-2 turns max.

Has anyone else been trying this? As, right now, this has seemed like a very strong tactic in our group, as the only flight group that has survived it is the Gallant Haven crew, but the fleet itself packs enough firepower to just blow up the Haven instead.

I guess one of my issues is that vs imps its fine. But what if you hit the mirror vs the gallant haven and now, your anti fighter is garbage. like 2 blue dice 2 hits brace and GH means no damage. The the rebel fighters get work done. I have gotten so much work from my squadrons ship bombardments is dumb. Like just pegging the shield arc you will be firing into is the worst feeling for your opponent. its like do i really use my defense tokens now and let the ship hit me? It happened last night as my buddy played a version of my OP list and I played a gallant haven list, like if you can kill rhymer your in a lot of trouble.

Having played (and won) that matchup twice, the answer is simple: kill the GH first or refuse to engage in a middle of map brawl. Preferably at long range, as the rebel fighters (unless they uncharacteristically went all A-wings, which is its own topic...) can't reach out and touch you without leaving the safety of the GH bubble. Don't get in close and engage, don't waste shots on the fighters in the GH bubble. Kill the GH and other capital ships at long range, as you definitely outgun them.

The matchup I actually worry about most with this build would be multiple Gladiators + Rhymer bomber swarm with no space superiority fighters or a Corvette spam build (the former is probably not going to be common in tournaments as it will be weak to many common builds... the latter is TBD).

If they spent that many points on squadrons in the GH build, you definitely outgun them at long range, so fight at the range you are made for and keep your speed up. It becomes a positioning battle as to if the GH can force you to close with it and the fighter screen, or if you refuse to commit and stay wide to grind it down. Either way, keeping range means the squadrons become dead weight, and at worst, you are forcing a draw.

The question then probably comes down to objectives.