Odd to see a Friday article so I have some hope for fun things Monday.

Bomber Wings and Fighter Screen

Thoughts?

Good detailed article, that takes into account not only the different capabilities of the fighters, but their place in different types of lists (ship focused, squad focused, bombers vs fighters). I especially like the point that your fighters are VP's that can be lost - it may be to your advantage to keep them out of the fight, at least until later in the game. It's a point that I haven't seen many people make, and on the field I usually see people toss their squadrons into the fight willy-nilly.

Yeah, I've had a bit of luck with a "TIE Fighter Gambit", slowly feeding 40 pts of squadron to my opponent over the course of the game to keep his blog clumped up and away from my ships.

Works well when paired with 2 VSD / 1 GSD.

Thoughts?

The engine on this Tie fighter is all wrong.

Yeah, I've had a bit of luck with a "TIE Fighter Gambit", slowly feeding 40 pts of squadron to my opponent over the course of the game to keep his blog clumped up and away from my ships.

Works well when paired with 2 VSD / 1 GSD.

Did this just this week, with a 1 VSD/2GSD list. A mere 4 TIEs managed to lock down 2 Y's (including Dutch), a B, and several X-wings for most of the game. I think they got 3 bomber shots on my ships the whole game. Granted my opponent rolled very poorly on his squadron attacks, but even so I thought the TIEs did extremely well.

Thoughts?

The engine on this Tie fighter is all wrong.

It really is. And now i have seen it, i cant look atit the same way.

CURSE YOU!

Interesting, I wasn't aware that squadrons could deploy outside of the 3 range to which capital ships are restricted. It adds significant reach to the squadrons in the first turn and makes Luke that much more interesting !

They show that in the rules guide I think.

Well, I'll need to pay more attention then

It's very interesting how they focus on two types of squadrons configuration with very specific roles in mind. I've found that Rebels have a bit more flexibility than they talk about (they took the A Wing as a very specialized fighter screen which it does very well). I played a 300 points game today with Luke, 2 X Wings, an A Wing, Dutch and a B-Wing and I feel that it struck a good balance between figher screen and bomber wing. They all have decent anti-squadron dice, and all squadrons have the Bomber rule.

I can see how Imperials have to be more specialized in their squadron support.

Thoughts?

The engine on this Tie fighter is all wrong.

It really is. And now i have seen it, i cant look atit the same way.

CURSE YOU!

Just try to imagine that the picture captures the instant a proton torpedo is plowing into the back of the Interceptor.

@Edsel62 Yup, that fixed it. Well played sir.

Nothing new in this article. Still don't like bombers and will continue to fly fighters. Experimenting with no fighters at all....we will see how that works out.

Nothing new for those of us who have a few dozen games under our belts but still useful for those that are still expanding their repertoire.

I liked the "Although, it's technically possible to launch a fleet without squadrons..." quote. I've only played one game using squadrons. I'm waiting for them to have more of a purpose. I'd rather sink points into more ships.

I like to play a couple squadrons at a time. Imperials can get away with rhymer rebels can not

I liked the "Although, it's technically possible to launch a fleet without squadrons..." quote. I've only played one game using squadrons. I'm waiting for them to have more of a purpose. I'd rather sink points into more ships.

Sorry, but the article is correct: any list with squadron investment is already at a large advantage over all-ship lists.

The point that I'd argue the article messes up is saying it's OK to invest on almost 70 points in a bomber wing. I'll even take out the advances, as those are very good as fighter screens OR makeshift bombers so 2 are easily recommended. However, buying rhymrr and 3 more bombers really is a dangerous move for imperials. They need a strong Fighter presence or all those points spent on bombers are wasted.

I do love the fundamental reveal of squadrons, which argues my initial rebuttal to JBar, being highly effective at shooting ships since their defenses are utter trash against squadron attacks. Best case is MM evade vs rhymer snipes. Otherwise you might get to brace off one damage from a heavy-hitter.

Image having to weather 5 blue dice and 3 blacks after your tokens have been used up from ship attacks. Statistically that's 5.5 damage that tokens won't effectively mitigate, and if you try my ship attacks might be even better next turn.

I like to quote Dano on this "When I kill all your ships I win and get the full 300 points"

Squadrons are helpful but I am sorry I HATE having to herd them around

I'm slowly being converted to the no fighters mindset. Even with bombers, I've been unable to cash in with rebel fighters. Just either I have the coldest dice when its for them or they just peck away too slowly to be effective.

Laws of averages work horribly with a single die

I'm slowly being converted to the no fighters mindset. Even with bombers, I've been unable to cash in with rebel fighters. Just either I have the coldest dice when its for them or they just peck away too slowly to be effective.

This. I'm making another post to adequately explain how I feel about it, but thus far I feel rebel fighters are overpriced.

So...I like using yavaris, adar talon, and luke... that combination is really deadly to any ship. Unless you roll all blanks.... Oh and toss in dodonna in the event you crit you can choose the best critical.

Luke by him self can win you the game with the right support. He has done well for me and I love How thematic it plays!

The "0 squadron" standpoint is interesting in the sense that it is as valid as the "have squadrons".

You're not shooting yourself in the foot without squadron, nor by having squadrons are you at a disadvantage because it takes points away from the ships.

What makes that debate both relevant and irrelevant in Armada is the fact that compared to real life strategy, both fleets are conceived blind. Compared to real life warfare, where you have enough intel to strategically conceive your forces to take on and achieve the goal you set, you make a fleet that you like or works well and you try to make the most of it depending on the situation.

Like Luke said, Luke Skywalker can win you a game (almost did for me today if I wasn't greedy and mopped up the remaining squadrons instead of trying to take down another ship He draw the crit that allowed to reduce the speed by 1 thanks to Dodonna, turning a VSD to speed 0 and preventing it from using defense tokens so it went down very quickly).

On the other hand, with proper positioning ships with 2 blue dice in anti-squadron can make short work of any squadron advantage a player might have over a couple of turns (ironically, this is how I lost today ).

/shrug

I'm more than happy to play against all-ship lists, and even more so against 4+ bombers.

I'm moving toward more squadrons at the moment... 4 x tie bombers plus a 46pt fighter screen. Still fine tuning my play - I think so far the difference between them being effective or useless has been my standard of play, which is exactly what you want.

Article was good.

nice article, covering the basics about fighters very well. The only thing I don't like about it is that "activate first to use a gap in the opponents screen"; it gives the wrong impression. There's no need for "gaps", fighters may move freely over/through any ship or squadron, you cannot block that movement. Only the end point of the movement is important, you may not overlap there.

Also, you need at least 4 squadrons to get any effect (better 5), be it as screen or for bombing. If you want to take less than that you better don't take any at all, it's a waste of points then.