I can see that as well. 7 points may not seem like a lot but it can be huge when it comes down to it. Hmmmm at 400 points I can fit 3 VSD's (1 or 2's) and 2 GSD 1's so yea compared to that I am not sure how good 3 ISD's will be.

Though that list has no upgrades but Skreed. I think I would use the VSD 1's so I can add upgrades to the GSD's.

I've tried one of those 3VSD/2GSD fleets. They're pretty stripped down--ACMs on both GSD Is, plus one Demolisher title leaves room for 3 VSD 1s, Motti/Screed, and 21/19 left over for VSD upgrades and/or your bid. You don't have much margin for error when you are engaged, but 3 VSD front arcs can deny an incredible amount of space on the board. Run maneuver commands for the first two or three turns and recklessly bull-rush at speed 2, and ACMs are almost viable on the VSD (expanded launchers maybe, too, though the price is a little high for my tastes; either way, odds are someone's forced into close range, either by the Gladiators or one of the other Victories pushing forwards). If your objective cuts the board size down (minefields, fleet ambush) or forces both sides into one spot (contested outpost), even better.

Plus the look on your opponent's face when you start is priceless...

Yet, my squadrons can easily kill 2-3 ships alone in a 6-turn game...especially if SupPos or precision strike gets picked, and this type of list has no answers to that. 5 50/50 rolls and 3 black dice is going to shred people who can't engage them.

Furthermore, if I'm comfortable tangoing with 2 impstars, 2 Vic's will not even remotely phase me. Plus, I'll have a raider with a ton of toys to combo with my demolisher to delete a flank.

I am not sure how your squadrons will kill 2 to 3 ships in a game. They will take shields down but unless you are killing nebs and CR90's I think you will get at best 1 maybe 2 if you roll REALLY good

How so? Due to the sluggish profile of victories, they can very easily deny a flank in the long-term. And as I've said multiple times: I'll put my upgraded Vic-1 against two nearly-naked impstars any day.

While I love the audacity of it, you would lost that engagement. They have the same firepower at long range and there are 2 of them. If you suck 184 points into a single VSD 1 I still don't see it winning.

I never said I'd win the engagement. I said I'd be happy to square off against them. That is to say, I'm using my 130ish point ship to engage two 92ish point ships...already I'm happy with the trade, as I have more non-engaged points to use wherever I please.

Take, for example, a game I had today (which mirrors a game against 2 VSDs a month ago) where one AFMKII was too far from his friend, not allowing them to support eachother. My entire 300 points worth of combat power slammed into ~210 of his. Essentially, I will win that fight hands down. If you force your opponent to split his focus in a way that allows you to direct more points at less of his points in a few rounds of combat: you will win.

So, i'm not saying my upgraded VSD will, alone, kill two naked-ISDs; I'm pointing out the fact that if he decides to square off in that way, I will have the upper hand as the rest of my points rolls up his flank and helps finish off one of ISDs, or kills the rest of his points while my VSD valiantly goes down in flames, hopefully taking at least one ISD and leaving the other wounded enough to be shot dead by the rest of my fleet.

I've tried one of those 3VSD/2GSD fleets. They're pretty stripped down--ACMs on both GSD Is, plus one Demolisher title leaves room for 3 VSD 1s, Motti/Screed, and 21/19 left over for VSD upgrades and/or your bid. You don't have much margin for error when you are engaged, but 3 VSD front arcs can deny an incredible amount of space on the board. Run maneuver commands for the first two or three turns and recklessly bull-rush at speed 2, and ACMs are almost viable on the VSD (expanded launchers maybe, too, though the price is a little high for my tastes; either way, odds are someone's forced into close range, either by the Gladiators or one of the other Victories pushing forwards). If your objective cuts the board size down (minefields, fleet ambush) or forces both sides into one spot (contested outpost), even better.

Plus the look on your opponent's face when you start is priceless...

Yet, my squadrons can easily kill 2-3 ships alone in a 6-turn game...especially if SupPos or precision strike gets picked, and this type of list has no answers to that. 5 50/50 rolls and 3 black dice is going to shred people who can't engage them.

Furthermore, if I'm comfortable tangoing with 2 impstars, 2 Vic's will not even remotely phase me. Plus, I'll have a raider with a ton of toys to combo with my demolisher to delete a flank.

These are all valid concerns. Superior Positions or Precision Strike would definitely pose problems, but the odds are high that you won't see either (as second player, which you'd probably be unless you really strip down your Vics, I wouldn't include either objective, and as first, any of the defense objectives look better than those, so it's hard to imagine a situation where you'd have to choose them, unless you like challenges). Lack of a fighter screen is a concern with any build that isn't built to move faster than bombers, and of course that problem is accentuated if Rhymer's involved (although my group doesn't usually play mirror matches).

The question was how that kind of five ship list (3VSDs/2Glads) would fare against a list with 3 ISDs. Without knowing point totals for the ISD, it's hard to know just how many bombers one can fit into a 3ISD list but assuming 92 per ISD, plus a commander at somewhere between 24-38 so far, you'd have somewhere between 86 and 100 points (assuming no upgrades to the ISDs, other than a commander). You can top out at Rhymer and 9 Bombers, depending on the commander you choose (assuming (1) you don't add any upgrades to your ISDs, beyond a commander, and (2) your fleet uses just wave 1 squadrons and not wave 2 squadrons, which look like they will cost more).

Whether those three ISDs + fighter wing are better than 3 Vics/2 Glads is the question. In theory, you would think that the bombers would give a decided advantage coupled with Rhymer's range, but there's a lot of variables to consider. To maximize them, you need squadron commands, so no repairs for the naked ISDs, and with their larger bases, I wonder how fast an ISD can go before it starts colliding with its fighter screen. Even naked Vics with Motti can take a pounding, and Vic Is + Glads + Screed can rack up damage, especially if ACMs are in play. In some ways, I think the higher speed of the ISDs will help the Vics, between that and bringing the enemy into the Vics firing arcs sooner, especially if the ISDs lose mobility at higher speeds.

It's not my preferred build, just commenting on an idea Lyraeus had mentioned in passing that I'd happened to try. I don't expect either list (3VSD/2Glads or 3ISDs) will be anything other than a novelty list, but it's fun to theorize (even with incomplete information).

Well, for me, they would be stuck with Fleet Ambush then. So 3 of their ships would be within striking range on turn one...as in EVERYTHING. 3 Black Dice and 5 Blue dice flying in at you (since you can't contend it) is going to cause a ton of damage, esp since tokens will be pretty useless. Average 5.5 damage or so, pile that ontop of Victory shots and then a demolisher saddling up next to a ship to unload...it would be scary for me, sure; but I run the list I run so that I never face a rock with my scissor fleet.

As to 3VSDs/2GSDs vs 3ISDs and maybe some squads: I don't see the point in discussing squadron-less builds. Essentially they auto-lose against non-gimick builds. The 3ISDs with the silly amount of bombers you thought up would probably decimate the aforementioned 5-ship list...but who cares? It's blatant scissors beating blatant paper.

The question is, then; how would the scissor build fare against any list with decent fighter support? About as well as a 300 pt ISD list against a 400 pt list.

I guess, however, that you guys acknowledge these lists as novelties...of course there I diverge and fail to see how it's fun talking about such terrible lists at all. It's like playing X-Wing and saying I'm going to run 6 HWK-290s; or making a 75 point list designed to kill X, and calling it a day.

I've tried one of those 3VSD/2GSD fleets. They're pretty stripped down--ACMs on both GSD Is, plus one Demolisher title leaves room for 3 VSD 1s, Motti/Screed, and 21/19 left over for VSD upgrades and/or your bid. You don't have much margin for error when you are engaged, but 3 VSD front arcs can deny an incredible amount of space on the board. Run maneuver commands for the first two or three turns and recklessly bull-rush at speed 2, and ACMs are almost viable on the VSD (expanded launchers maybe, too, though the price is a little high for my tastes; either way, odds are someone's forced into close range, either by the Gladiators or one of the other Victories pushing forwards). If your objective cuts the board size down (minefields, fleet ambush) or forces both sides into one spot (contested outpost), even better.

Plus the look on your opponent's face when you start is priceless...

Yet, my squadrons can easily kill 2-3 ships alone in a 6-turn game...especially if SupPos or precision strike gets picked, and this type of list has no answers to that. 5 50/50 rolls and 3 black dice is going to shred people who can't engage them.

Furthermore, if I'm comfortable tangoing with 2 impstars, 2 Vic's will not even remotely phase me. Plus, I'll have a raider with a ton of toys to combo with my demolisher to delete a flank.

I am not sure how your squadrons will kill 2 to 3 ships in a game. They will take shields down but unless you are killing nebs and CR90's I think you will get at best 1 maybe 2 if you roll REALLY good

If the opponent has zero squadrons, this isn't remotely unreasonable. If you park in front of a non-corvette ship, it's pretty likely you'll get landed on...so put your ship back in front. If they're going fast enough you might only get 3 turns of shooting, but there are other things on the board that can/will threaten them, so shooting with single attacks that can eat through shields in such a way that tokens simply won't help much means that even that massively shielded AFMKII with Advanced Projectors is going to explode fast when you chuck up to 9 blacks and 15 blues at it.

Perhaps Rhymer skews my view on the effectiveness of squadrons against ships? However, my brother and I were testing B-Wings and the medium-base ships, and you can just keep blasting their front unless they can speed-3 past you: this alone can cause the other elements of your force to kill off the AF or nebulon, etc.

The point is, the same concept of Vic1 that is uses primarily for area denial: you don't have to directly use your points for them to work. Consider Gallant Haven that is never used, but allows the rebel formation to get right in the teeth of the imps and jump out to utterly decimate their fighter wing...never once did the GH ability fire, but it won you the dogfight.

I think the "Relentless" title upgrade for the ISD is worth a whole lotta talkin' 'bout. For only 3 points, it makes the big boy really light on his feet. You only have to assign two command dials to the ship now, but you still have the ability to bank three command tokens. So your huge, giant Imperial – class beat stick now dances around the battlefield like a Gladiator. I think that title card is going to heavily contend for most– used Imperial upgrade alongside "Demolisher."

At this point I am more worried about MC30cs. x.x

At this point I am more worried about MC30cs. x.x

Ok, even if you have a squadron parked in front of a VSD, at speed 2 it can either hop over or when you place it base to base it will then later move past it. This might not be true for the 5" bases of large ships but it is still a possibility.

Now on average a blue dice TIE Fighter has a 50% chance to hit its target. A TIE bomber will on average deal 1 damage, even with a ton of them you would at best strip some shields and maybe deal a damage but there is no way you can get all of them to hit unless you are using Rhymer and even then you don't have enough squadron commands to get every one each turn. So some of them will be lagging and thus wasted.

I played against it, and once you have seen it you cannot unsee it.

EMPIRE FLEET (400 points)
1 • Victory I-class Star Destroyer - Admiral Motti - Director Isard (100)
2 • Victory I-class Star Destroyer - Enhanced Armament (83)
3 • Victory I-class Star Destroyer - Enhanced Armament (83)
4 • Victory I-class Star Destroyer (73)
5 • Major Rhymer TIE Bomber Squadron (16)
6 • TIE Bomber Squadron (9)
7 • TIE Bomber Squadron (9)
8 • TIE Bomber Squadron (9)
9 • TIE Bomber Squadron (9)
10 • TIE Bomber Squadron (9)

My opponent started his ships at speed 2, and slowed them down to speed 1 progressivey so that as I flew forward he had me between his fleet and the board edge. We basically traded ships and I won only by 18vp because, not having fighters, I took Assault Frigates with 2 Blue Anti-Squadron dice.

Hmmm I think I would have stuck with 3 VSD's but if he herded you then he was doing amazing!

I would have stuck to 3 to get more squadrons. While bombers are great having fighters and interceptors gives you flexibility against fighter lists. I build with versatility in mind but that is me.

The main problem I had was I couldn't loiter in front of the line of ships, my AF's had to sideslip down the line and then start to loop back under his formation. What seemed to happen is I would get the ship I was attacking down to 1-2 hull and then run past it and get to the next. It wasn't until I could run back up the line that I was able to run back up his line that I got two kills.

These are all valid concerns. Superior Positions or Precision Strike would definitely pose problems, but the odds are high that you won't see either (as second player, which you'd probably be unless you really strip down your Vics, I wouldn't include either objective, and as first, any of the defense objectives look better than those, so it's hard to imagine a situation where you'd have to choose them, unless you like challenges). Lack of a fighter screen is a concern with any build that isn't built to move faster than bombers, and of course that problem is accentuated if Rhymer's involved (although my group doesn't usually play mirror matches).

The question was how that kind of five ship list (3VSDs/2Glads) would fare against a list with 3 ISDs. Without knowing point totals for the ISD, it's hard to know just how many bombers one can fit into a 3ISD list but assuming 92 per ISD, plus a commander at somewhere between 24-38 so far, you'd have somewhere between 86 and 100 points (assuming no upgrades to the ISDs, other than a commander). You can top out at Rhymer and 9 Bombers, depending on the commander you choose (assuming (1) you don't add any upgrades to your ISDs, beyond a commander, and (2) your fleet uses just wave 1 squadrons and not wave 2 squadrons, which look like they will cost more).

Whether those three ISDs + fighter wing are better than 3 Vics/2 Glads is the question. In theory, you would think that the bombers would give a decided advantage coupled with Rhymer's range, but there's a lot of variables to consider. To maximize them, you need squadron commands, so no repairs for the naked ISDs, and with their larger bases, I wonder how fast an ISD can go before it starts colliding with its fighter screen. Even naked Vics with Motti can take a pounding, and Vic Is + Glads + Screed can rack up damage, especially if ACMs are in play. In some ways, I think the higher speed of the ISDs will help the Vics, between that and bringing the enemy into the Vics firing arcs sooner, especially if the ISDs lose mobility at higher speeds.

It's not my preferred build, just commenting on an idea Lyraeus had mentioned in passing that I'd happened to try. I don't expect either list (3VSD/2Glads or 3ISDs) will be anything other than a novelty list, but it's fun to theorize (even with incomplete information).

Well, for me, they would be stuck with Fleet Ambush then. So 3 of their ships would be within striking range on turn one...as in EVERYTHING. 3 Black Dice and 5 Blue dice flying in at you (since you can't contend it) is going to cause a ton of damage, esp since tokens will be pretty useless. Average 5.5 damage or so, pile that ontop of Victory shots and then a demolisher saddling up next to a ship to unload...it would be scary for me, sure; but I run the list I run so that I never face a rock with my scissor fleet.

As to 3VSDs/2GSDs vs 3ISDs and maybe some squads: I don't see the point in discussing squadron-less builds. Essentially they auto-lose against non-gimick builds. The 3ISDs with the silly amount of bombers you thought up would probably decimate the aforementioned 5-ship list...but who cares? It's blatant scissors beating blatant paper.

The question is, then; how would the scissor build fare against any list with decent fighter support? About as well as a 300 pt ISD list against a 400 pt list.

I guess, however, that you guys acknowledge these lists as novelties...of course there I diverge and fail to see how it's fun talking about such terrible lists at all. It's like playing X-Wing and saying I'm going to run 6 HWK-290s; or making a 75 point list designed to kill X, and calling it a day.

Well, I won't speak for Lyraeus, but yes, I see these sorts of thin ship builds as more of a novelty. But I don't think that means they--or all squadron-less builds--are auto-lose against non-gimmick builds (by which I assume you mean builds with squadrons?). Five ships vs. three ships plus squadrons means the five ship build has two more activations, which (assuming you maneuver them correctly, plan out commands insightfully, etc.--far from a given, I'll grant) is nothing to sneeze at, especially if the five ship build goes first and can set-up last-turn-first-turn combo moves. Over time, those extra activations add up, and you have a larger margin of error between you and your fleet being tabled The disparity in hull between a 3VSD/2GSD fleet and a VSD/2GSD or 2VSD/GSD fleet is at least 8 hull (another VSD's worth of damage) and potentially as high as 22 hull, depending on fleet make-up and whether Motti is involved. If a flight of bombers can make up that difference, that'd be fabulous, but that seems a tall order (unless you have a horde of B-wings). Your five ships also have greater freedom to roam the board, as there's no need to keep a carrier ship within activation distance of your squadrons. Never worrying about calling a squadron command is also one less thing to worry about with your 3 command Vics.

Personally, I love using the squadrons (for thematic reasons), but I'll be the first to admit that my ability to use them isn't nearly as high as yours (I've never destroyed 2-3 ships due to significant contributions from squadrons , let alone routinely). That's probably a mark on my abilities as a fleet commander, and something for me to work on. But judging from the forum comments, there seems to be a fair number of players who are running squadron-less builds because they don't like squadrons thematically, can't make them worth the point cost, aren't sold on their attack abilities, etc., and are experiencing a fair bit of success in both casual and tournament play. This suggests to me that either there's no inherent superiority for a mixed-ship-and-fighter list over an all-ship list, they're playing against other all-ship lists, their mixed-list opponents aren't proficient with squadrons/bombers, or go too heavy on anti-squadron fighters that they're unprepared for ship-only builds (a problem for the empire's anti-squadron fighters in particular).

At this point, though, I think we're veering a bit far from the OP's topic, so I'll stop. I'm just glad that the game affords this kind of list-building flexibility to players to accommodate different play styles, and am excited to see how Wave 2 contributes to this (hopefully today :-) ).

The main problem I had was I couldn't loiter in front of the line of ships, my AF's had to sideslip down the line and then start to loop back under his formation. What seemed to happen is I would get the ship I was attacking down to 1-2 hull and then run past it and get to the next. It wasn't until I could run back up the line that I was able to run back up his line that I got two kills.

These are all valid concerns. Superior Positions or Precision Strike would definitely pose problems, but the odds are high that you won't see either (as second player, which you'd probably be unless you really strip down your Vics, I wouldn't include either objective, and as first, any of the defense objectives look better than those, so it's hard to imagine a situation where you'd have to choose them, unless you like challenges). Lack of a fighter screen is a concern with any build that isn't built to move faster than bombers, and of course that problem is accentuated if Rhymer's involved (although my group doesn't usually play mirror matches).

The question was how that kind of five ship list (3VSDs/2Glads) would fare against a list with 3 ISDs. Without knowing point totals for the ISD, it's hard to know just how many bombers one can fit into a 3ISD list but assuming 92 per ISD, plus a commander at somewhere between 24-38 so far, you'd have somewhere between 86 and 100 points (assuming no upgrades to the ISDs, other than a commander). You can top out at Rhymer and 9 Bombers, depending on the commander you choose (assuming (1) you don't add any upgrades to your ISDs, beyond a commander, and (2) your fleet uses just wave 1 squadrons and not wave 2 squadrons, which look like they will cost more).

Whether those three ISDs + fighter wing are better than 3 Vics/2 Glads is the question. In theory, you would think that the bombers would give a decided advantage coupled with Rhymer's range, but there's a lot of variables to consider. To maximize them, you need squadron commands, so no repairs for the naked ISDs, and with their larger bases, I wonder how fast an ISD can go before it starts colliding with its fighter screen. Even naked Vics with Motti can take a pounding, and Vic Is + Glads + Screed can rack up damage, especially if ACMs are in play. In some ways, I think the higher speed of the ISDs will help the Vics, between that and bringing the enemy into the Vics firing arcs sooner, especially if the ISDs lose mobility at higher speeds.

It's not my preferred build, just commenting on an idea Lyraeus had mentioned in passing that I'd happened to try. I don't expect either list (3VSD/2Glads or 3ISDs) will be anything other than a novelty list, but it's fun to theorize (even with incomplete information).

Well, for me, they would be stuck with Fleet Ambush then. So 3 of their ships would be within striking range on turn one...as in EVERYTHING. 3 Black Dice and 5 Blue dice flying in at you (since you can't contend it) is going to cause a ton of damage, esp since tokens will be pretty useless. Average 5.5 damage or so, pile that ontop of Victory shots and then a demolisher saddling up next to a ship to unload...it would be scary for me, sure; but I run the list I run so that I never face a rock with my scissor fleet.

As to 3VSDs/2GSDs vs 3ISDs and maybe some squads: I don't see the point in discussing squadron-less builds. Essentially they auto-lose against non-gimick builds. The 3ISDs with the silly amount of bombers you thought up would probably decimate the aforementioned 5-ship list...but who cares? It's blatant scissors beating blatant paper.

The question is, then; how would the scissor build fare against any list with decent fighter support? About as well as a 300 pt ISD list against a 400 pt list.

I guess, however, that you guys acknowledge these lists as novelties...of course there I diverge and fail to see how it's fun talking about such terrible lists at all. It's like playing X-Wing and saying I'm going to run 6 HWK-290s; or making a 75 point list designed to kill X, and calling it a day.

Well, I won't speak for Lyraeus, but yes, I see these sorts of thin ship builds as more of a novelty. But I don't think that means they--or all squadron-less builds--are auto-lose against non-gimmick builds (by which I assume you mean builds with squadrons?). Five ships vs. three ships plus squadrons means the five ship build has two more activations, which (assuming you maneuver them correctly, plan out commands insightfully, etc.--far from a given, I'll grant) is nothing to sneeze at, especially if the five ship build goes first and can set-up last-turn-first-turn combo moves. Over time, those extra activations add up, and you have a larger margin of error between you and your fleet being tabled The disparity in hull between a 3VSD/2GSD fleet and a VSD/2GSD or 2VSD/GSD fleet is at least 8 hull (another VSD's worth of damage) and potentially as high as 22 hull, depending on fleet make-up and whether Motti is involved. If a flight of bombers can make up that difference, that'd be fabulous, but that seems a tall order (unless you have a horde of B-wings). Your five ships also have greater freedom to roam the board, as there's no need to keep a carrier ship within activation distance of your squadrons. Never worrying about calling a squadron command is also one less thing to worry about with your 3 command Vics.

Personally, I love using the squadrons (for thematic reasons), but I'll be the first to admit that my ability to use them isn't nearly as high as yours (I've never destroyed 2-3 ships due to significant contributions from squadrons , let alone routinely). That's probably a mark on my abilities as a fleet commander, and something for me to work on. But judging from the forum comments, there seems to be a fair number of players who are running squadron-less builds because they don't like squadrons thematically, can't make them worth the point cost, aren't sold on their attack abilities, etc., and are experiencing a fair bit of success in both casual and tournament play. This suggests to me that either there's no inherent superiority for a mixed-ship-and-fighter list over an all-ship list, they're playing against other all-ship lists, their mixed-list opponents aren't proficient with squadrons/bombers, or go too heavy on anti-squadron fighters that they're unprepared for ship-only builds (a problem for the empire's anti-squadron fighters in particular).

At this point, though, I think we're veering a bit far from the OP's topic, so I'll stop. I'm just glad that the game affords this kind of list-building flexibility to players to accommodate different play styles, and am excited to see how Wave 2 contributes to this (hopefully today :-) ).

Second, Rythbryt you are a smart cookie! Not being sarcastic or anything, I am up on less than 4 hours of sleep due to work *muffled curses at work*

You have it right. Even with squadrons a 5 ship list will lose at best is 1 maybe 2 ships to the combined firepower of squadrons and ships any opponent can currently bring to bear. It becomes harder to concentrate firepower when that many ships are on the board.

At best if you have 3 ships you will have lost out on as was said activations. That means I will have more dice coming at you per turn than your squadrons and 3 ships can throw on average. That is huge.

You will have to then corner 4 ships that are switching speeds as they go to shore up flanks and spread the trap. It is actually quite beautiful when done right

The problem, I feel, everyone is making here (and the Impstars will suffer greatly) is making; is they assume you'll get good shots, not bump, not run over rocks, etc. it's kind of the same deal as X-Wing where a swarm player has a harder game due to shear mental overtaxation via planning for 5 ships.

My competitive imp list hasn't lost a game yet, worst MoV was 7-3 against 4 corvettes and 9 A-Wings. The reason was actually shooting the little asshats. My opponents biggest issue was flying all the ships well even with immediate dial response. Furthermore, as I reflect, one thing that made the wins more decisive was engaging a fraction of their force for one-two turns with ALL of mine.

This is something that people oft overlook in discussing all-ship builds: squads can very easily go exactly where they need. If I spend 100 points on 3 black and 5 blue that I can focus fire easily, and you spend those 100 pts on 2 ships that require getting both in range to equal my shots; chances are you'll have a harder time actually using those dice as well as I can.

Not to mention tokens are much better against 2-3 sep multi dice attacks vs 8 single dice attacks.

Remember, armada is brutal once the lasers fly...you might be right that my squads only get a few turns of shooting; however, the difference is that I see those 2-3 shots as game-winning where others don't.

I have been saying that large ships capabilities are balanced by the size of their bases. I have advocated for that since day 1. They will be good but you could in all possibility run over 3 obstacles in 1 move. That is silly but possible. They are strong but not invincible.

Tokens actually are better against bigger attacks. Oh you rolled 9 dice got 2 hits, 2 crits, 3 accuracy on the blues, 1 hit, 1 blank, and a crit on the reds. Congrats you did 6 damage and negated all the tokens, if they have ECMs that's braced to 3. No longer as much damage but still effective, it only cost you 2 shields and a dial.

If they don't have ECMs then they took anywhere from 5 to 3 damage. Enough to kill a Nebulon-B on the side but I am not sure why he would be in the front arc like that but not enough to one shot anything else.

Several attacks however, as proven by the thread on dice , are more effective overall. In a double arc scenario with a VSD2 you could get as much as 10 dice without Dominator. They would have had to use tokens on the main front arc if they could and the second strike would hit the same unprotected arc debilitating them or taking them out entirely.

It's fine that you have not lost in your area bit that means tactically the people you are playing are not at your level. When you meet someone at your level, we'll see what occurs.

It's not that I don't see them as game winning. You can't win without shooting at things. I see them as more than just damage. I see the statistics behind them. I also play against people who are tactically as good if not better than I am. This means I don't get those easy bombing runs. I have to work and plan on everything and be meticulous about it (while plotting 2 to 3 turns ahead so I don't slow the game down). That is how this game works

yup, FFG still needs to release spoilers (goddamnit FFG, spoilers not strategy!)

from what we do know, however, it seems that the ISD will have ways to get around its size. Not that that's necessarily a bad thing, but it will depend on price relative to its smaller brother.

For now, I guess I'm most fixated by the so far unequaled Squadron 4, which gives it a very nice way to get around defensive tokens with more attacks, and the very nifty 2 anti-squadron (even if it's one blue, one black). There was the oddity of the evade token, but since there's no room on a card for five defense tokens (unless FFG creates some abomination ) it's possible that it's just an upgrade and not part of the ship's natural capabilities.

The ISD is like some sort of primordial Nebulon (especially with Relentless), the tyrannosaurus to today's little birds

Thinking it over, 92 points for the ISD-1 wouldn't be the worst thing in the world compared to the VSD-2. Though considerably chunckier, it throws less dice at medium range and has a bigger arse to target. The front arc is freaking scary, but the one addition die in the sides aren't terribly impressive. While the butt arc is quite a bit better with 1 more total die and two blues, it's still a horrible arc for a 92 point monster.

assuming we don't get an absurd offensive title (or, if we do, it costs a lot), I think a Dominator VSD-2 will remain my go-to gunboat.

still, I can't help but imagine the horror of the ISD flinging around 5/6 squadrons a turn

Star destroyer's bases are their crippling weakness. It allows swarm players to more easily concentrate fire, it blocks and obscures more shots from adjacent friendly ships in formation, is a pain to try to move around obsticals and your other ships, and even at speed three it should feel like the handling of a victory at speed 2.

The arcs are huge! Very easy to line up a dual attack against it. You can have more ships target the same hull zone. Think of how many X-wings can jump on the front, and you wont be able to throw them off. At speed 3 the back of your base would still overlap them.

A conga line of AF2's would love to face off a dual or triple ISD, because you wouldn't be able to concentrate your firepower like smaller ships would.

I just don't see the ISD 1 at 92ish points being that big of a deal. Multiple of them would probably shoot you in the foot. I think they are designed as the roll of a spearhead, or flagship, with smaller ships supporting them.

2 large ships side by side, if the enemy approaches trying to flank, the other ISD is far enough away to completely miss black dice range, and possibly medium too! Not to mention obsured. And a 100+ point ship throwing 2 red dice is not impressive/effective.

However, think of the range they can activate and fling their squadrons! Medium range from their base covers a lot of space, so that's something.

I have been saying that large ships capabilities are balanced by the size of their bases. I have advocated for that since day 1. They will be good but you could in all possibility run over 3 obstacles in 1 move. That is silly but possible. They are strong but not invincible.

Tokens actually are better against bigger attacks. Oh you rolled 9 dice got 2 hits, 2 crits, 3 accuracy on the blues, 1 hit, 1 blank, and a crit on the reds. Congrats you did 6 damage and negated all the tokens, if they have ECMs that's braced to 3. No longer as much damage but still effective, it only cost you 2 shields and a dial.

If they don't have ECMs then they took anywhere from 5 to 3 damage. Enough to kill a Nebulon-B on the side but I am not sure why he would be in the front arc like that but not enough to one shot anything else.

Several attacks however, as proven by the thread on dice , are more effective overall. In a double arc scenario with a VSD2 you could get as much as 10 dice without Dominator. They would have had to use tokens on the main front arc if they could and the second strike would hit the same unprotected arc debilitating them or taking them out entirely.

It's fine that you have not lost in your area bit that means tactically the people you are playing are not at your level. When you meet someone at your level, we'll see what occurs.

That's exactly what I said: If I spend 100 points on 5 blue and 3 black dice that each get thrown seperate, and you spend 100 pts on, similar dice on a ship...even if you line up your shots together my attacks are simply better.

Also, squadrons are much more mobile than ships; the drawback, of course, is the move OR shoot w/o command issue. However, if we're talking about ISDs, Correllian Corvette points out that they simply can't escape them at all if you end up directly in front of the ship. Not to mention, if you're flying 5-6 ships, I'll also have a lot more influence over your moves since I can punish you with a fleet of squadrons if you make move X, so you're likely to make move Y or Z which I can THEN punish you for: again, you never have to use an ability to get its usefulness realized.

As for the quality of play around here: I agree. I'd like to play people who have more game understanding, yet most of my games have been against my brother. The first tournament was early in the game's life and everyone's excuse was "I'm new to the game". Yet, I fail to see how this is entirely relevant in mental planning of fleets and actual game knowledge. Perhaps my background of Warhammer has better prepared me for Armada, or (more likely) my thought processes simply click perfectly with how this game plays...so I don't see how you could get exponentially better by playing a few more games or thinking a few more hours on strategy.

This, I feel, ties into these types of conversations on the boards. People claim "the meta is new" so no one can say what is actually good or bad; yet there is always objective knowledge about how things function, and I try to apply it. Yet, without any games or knowledge of exact stats, I can reason that piling on ISDs will simply fail in a game that intuitively counters lack of diversity. It harkens back to how metas are formed: if all ship lists have a massive disadvantage to anyone to has a reasonable investment into squadrons, then all-ship lists simply won't get taken...thus the core concepts of the game define the meta.

See: Fat Turrets in X-Wing to see this in action. Of course, it's also partly self-fullfilling prophecy; as good combo's don't get taken as they are seen as not optimal...when they very-well might be.

I am not sure how you are fielding your squadrons but you make it sound like you only use squadron commands while nice I think you are over estimating them. This is likely due to the lack of challenges you face in your area.

I actually believe that there is no "meta". That is all due to the balance of the game. I play, win, and lose as much with my Imperials as my rebels. I play both and thus know the strengths and weaknesses of each. Oh I make mistakes, it happens often enough but I learn and move on.

People said a 3 VSD list at 300 points would suffer the same issues but it is actually a good list. Oh sure a single VSD is likely to die but that is mitigated by the sheer amount of power that they unleash.

This game has more to it than dice. Placement of obstacles, deployment, upgrades, etc. They all factor in. I can guarantee that if you played 5 games with the same list against the same person and their same list you would have 5 seperate games that are only vaguely simular if at all. I know when I tested that theory every game was different

I agree completely with your second and fourth points...yet I feel they contradict your first heavily as well. I never said "just dice", in fact I qualified that my squadrons dice are better, I pointed out that your final points concerns were actually the ones that hurt you more even after you consider dice.

However, I would argue that it is perhaps you that doesn't quite understand the squadron game and underestimates their contribution. All of my points, thus far, have been conceding NO squadron commands. The point that medium ships require speed 3 to give me ONLY 2-3 shots. Speed 2 can get bogged down on squadrons all day, and 1 more assuredly will. Large ships will NEVER outrun squadrons. I plop them in front and you run me over and i end up in front again...even with turns I don't think you can avoid them (of course we need the actual base to test).

This is, again, ignoring your final point...which I allude to in pretty much every post: I can win the game BECAUSE of my Vic-1, and never fire its guns. It's that simple. It's funny that you essentially acknowledge this point in the last paragraph, yet you don't seem to be actually considering it. If you run away from my Vic-1's front arc, i KNOW you won't be in position X. Therefore, your ship only has Y and Z options to be: therefore I can focus every other point I have into those spots and potentially kill you BECAUSE you were avoiding the Victory's kill zone.

As to your 3rd point: consider my 2nd and 3rd tourney games, one was almost a mirror match and the other was 2 VSDs with squad support half bombers/half TIEs. Essentially, at the end of turn 3, in both games, I had killed one of my opponents ships. He had had limited return fire, and his second ship hadn't engaged. I've basically won the entire game already...he's running his 200-220 point list against my 300 point list.

This is going to be how 5-6 ship lists suffer and die. Currently, 3 VSD lists are, imo, terrible. I can threaten you front, using obstacles to hem your movement, with 111 points while 188pts rolls up to the side of one of your Victories and deletes it. Then my mobile ship and squadrons are never in danger due to your bad back/side arcs and your line will die fast. Perhaps a wedge formation would make this semi-effective, as my 2VSD oppoent had is support on the far side. However, This still screams "split force" to me and i'm happy to focus fire one of your ships dead while you only get limited/no support from the rest of your ships.

All said and done, I think we need to organize some tactical-experimentation games on Vassal to play through these tactical ideas! Would be fun imo. Test settups, and play around with how everything interacts.

At speed 2 a VSD will hit a squadron at range 1 from it, after that hit the squadron placed on the front of the ship will get 1 more shot before being passed over, the squadron MAY get a 3rd shot off. I know this because I have been working on B-Wing no squadron support videos. There are ways to position. The squadron to get the max of 3 attacks but that requires clever placement and a VSD that is focused on something else. Now a ISD (got to stay on topic somewhere in here) base is a bit over 5 inches. Speed 2 is about what 6" in to the tool, that means the squadron bases would possibly nick it in an overlap every time it goes straight at speed 2. If an ISD is barely nicking that then a 4" base of a VSD won't nick them. Of course your playing Imperials so you have Rhymer.

With Rhymer, you will get more shots off, for sure. The downside is the mathematics behind the rolls as I stated earlier last page or so. Maybe you roll well with squadrons but I get my averages, my ties and X-Wings roll average, my B-Wings and bombers roll average, that's how it works. Sure if you watch my B-Wing video you will see a could of great rolls on 2 attacks each but there is also that one bad roll. It balances out.

I agree with the split force concept except you can't always bring to bear your full points value, your GSD might be out and about unable to catch a CR90, that space whale might of just passed the front arc of the VSD and is on the opposite side of your squadrons so they lose a dice, the opponent could use an obstacle to debate all of your squadrons fire power, etc. All tactically sound and viable (I use these tricks often), hell he could juke you and make you overextend. That's why games are never the same thing going twice.

So along the lines of being at Y or Z from X, that is smart play and I have used it, I have seen others use it and it took time to understand it. Many people though don't have that concept in their head. In X-Wing there are tons of possibilities, in Armada just a deciding less amount. So predicting and positioning is how you win. I think the people you play with need to learn to juke more but that is me personally.

3 VSD's are stronger than you give credit. Oh sure you can Rhymer a ship to death but you still have to get into their range and play their game.

(of course we need the actual base to test).

Well, the measurements are stated in the Rules Reference - no reason why you can't mock one up in Cardboard.

(of course we need the actual base to test).

Well, the measurements are stated in the Rules Reference - no reason why you can't mock one up in Cardboard.

I agree, need more high-caliber opponents...but we just had a tourney scheduled sunday: only one other guy showed up. So I didn't get any new acrylic tokens as we couldn't play. Anyway, I trounced him twice, handily. It's still fun to play, but I would like some more challenging battles.

Don't see how you go from 10 players to 2 in a month :/

I agree, need more high-caliber opponents...but we just had a tourney scheduled sunday: only one other guy showed up. So I didn't get any new acrylic tokens as we couldn't play. Anyway, I trounced him twice, handily. It's still fun to play, but I would like some more challenging battles.

Don't see how you go from 10 players to 2 in a month :/

I am in Sydney and have been looking out for some extra people. PM if interested. Not that I can promise to be any better of an oopponent for you, though I will try.

Appologies if that is a bit too far to travel.

Today's Word of the Day is "Conjecture".

Come back tomorrow kids when Clonetrooper5 Tarkins this thread.(Insert Mon Calamari voice.)