A few questions: Just as a short thought,

1. what do you think the minimum points are for squadrons at 300 and 400 pts?

I'm going to answer about 50 for 300, 75 for 400.

2. How much does an extra anti-squadron die matter?

I'm going to answer: About 6 points. Terrible in the early game alpha strike 2, very nice in the middle game 3 4 against stranded squadrons when youre too far from regular attacks, again bad at 5 and 6 closing the game.

Basically, adding an extra blue dice is really only worth about 6 points. Less than another tie fighter. Many times, I'd rather have the tie.

EDIT: Actually, no, I prefer having the extra anti-squadron dice.

@Blail : I think the minimum investment if you wish to have squadrons is about 50 points indeed (as long as you have some form of cheap squadron support ship). Their impact on the game will be very limited though so you have to choose what you're going to want them to do.

In general, more fighters is better than more points spent for each fighter, so that you have enough dice to throw at the enemy

B-wings are the single greatest source of damage output in the game (yavaris, baby!), but relative to rhymer their range is limited. They are the rebel's thus far only source of hilarious close-range firepower, able to smack around VSDs and GSDs alike, but they are not terribly great at chasing down ships that don't have to engage you. after the initial engagement (medium range from commanding ship + more than medium range move & shoot) they move slightly more than medium from their initial position, making it possible for fast, long range ships such as CR-90as and Fatties to strafe. Rebels have more reliable sources for convincing long range firepower than their squadrons (apart from maybe A-wings) can offer; leaning too heavily on B-wings forgoes that advantage.

Yavaris and b wings are fine so long as the timing works out. What I've noticed, when I'm playing as imperials against yavaris, is that since the b wings can't be moved in order to get the double activation, they need to be in range of yavaris and yavaris needs to go before it can be destroyed.

If the timing doesn't work for the rebels, then they lose yavaris before it can cause the b wings to double tap because it's that close to imperial ships and being that close is not a good thing, especially with demolisher on the table. I also make sure to tie down rebel squadrons using 2 waves, staggered to avoid being engaged to deny the rebels getting shots at ships. First wave engages all potential rebel squadrons (as imperials, I find I almost always outnumber the rebels in total squadron units due to cheaper cost), they often are lost, but then second wave moves in, locking down any bomber threats, (usually b wings as the xwings tear my fie fighters apart) and I take out yavaris before it can cause any squadrons to double tap any of my ships.

I have yet to find this to not work, which is not saying I'm good, Im not. I'm average at best. The point I'm making here is that the investment in squadrons is a gamble on whether or not they can be useful enough in the game to warrant their cost over another ship. In my view, while I would love to have more squadrons because, well hey, it's star wars!, I find that more ships is a much more reliable source of damage and control over squadrons.

This may be due to player skill, but that's the rub. If a mechanic requires higher skill in order to become as effective as another mechanic in the game that requires less skill (more skill - squadron control, less skill - ship control), then that investment may be not be a viable purchase for most players.

My experience so far has been that the side with more squadrons in place of more ships (ie spent enough points on squadrons that another ship is not included) loses the match with player skill and game experience being about equal. This has made squadrons, in my experience, a less than ideal investment as opposed to another ship. Also, just to be clear, Im not advocating zero squadrons, but rather enough squadrons to tie down an opponents squadrons while still having enough points to have another ship on the table. So with imperials, I like to get 3 ships on the map (2 gsd, 1 vsd) and with rebels, I like to get 4 ships on the map (1 af2, 2 neb, 1 cr90) with remaining points going into squadrons. That extra ship is always naked, but even naked it generally performs better throughout all 6 rounds than squadrons who can often be negated throughout most, if not all of the match.

it's not necessarily a more skill intensive mechanic as much as Squadrons are a completely unique mechanic to the game and take getting used to

I've had my B-wings engaged on numerous occasions, and every time the enemy squadrons were a non-factor by the time something important (Such as the demolisher) came into range.

What happened is squadroned X-wings or yavarised B-wings tear them apart even with just 3 anti-squadron a pop (Total of 6 dice, aka Wedge tier), Neb anti-squadron fire pops them, or A-wings engage the 2nd wave before they can become useful.

it is a delicate dance on both sides of the table. For the squadron player, you have to position your squadrons and ships in a way such that they cover each other. For the engaging player, you have to hit the enemy ships while their squadrons are engaged (a window of opportunity that can last literally a single activation, if the enemy has more than one ship with a Squadron command qued). If there are a greater number of squadrons engaging the enemy squadrons, odds are just focusing on winning on squadron points can secure them the game.

mind you, this is experience through triple Nebulons. Going for the ships, which are 57 and 65 points apart from the flagship, is pretty **** difficult to do effectively because the nebs are so cheap that it can easily require more points worth on engaging squadrons to keep bombers down long enough to have any impact.

with haven, it's not as simple. I found that using Haven aggressively against balanced; bordering on heavy lists (such as VSD skreed, rhymer bombers & howlie interceptors, and demolisher) is a dicey proposition because Haven is expensive. If I lose Haven setting up squadrons, chances are I can't even make up the points difference even if I kill 100 points worth of squadrons. This leads to a far more defensive use of the 5 Xs + Dutch I bring along with my two fatties, keeping them mainly as a bomber/demolisher deterrent while the fatties maintain long range

_{Well, you've just made my point, though I think unintentionally}

_{It requires more skill to factor in more inter-relations between your ships, your squadrons, your enemies ships and your enemies squadrons with regards to movement and positioning as opposed to say mostly ships and a few squadrons. Most people, at least in my experience, struggle with all those inter-relations. If I move those there and he moves that here and I move that someplace else and maybe if he doesn't double his speed from 1-3 with demolisher this round then I can go over there, now I need to make sure he doesn't engage these squadrons here so I can use my squadron command next turn as my ship is moving at speed 3, but if I do that, then that squadron will just be cannon due to locking down his squadrons.. etc etc. A lot more choices and a lot more skill with unit placement is needed than with few squadrons and mostly ships.}

_{We see post after post of people who struggle with keeping their squadrons with their ships. Why? Because it's a more skill intensive mechanic to master. You have to plan not only your ship placement, but also your squadron placement so that they either don't become unintentionally engaged or so that they can be in range to be activated.}

_{Using yavaris? Great, but now you have to figure out how to get it and it's squadrons in place so that on the next turn, in order to utilize them for the double tap, that they are in range 1 of something and that the ship itself doesn't get destroyed in the process before it can make effective use of it's ability. Granted some will charge right at it while it's still full shields and health, but that doesn't mean a person was efficient, it just means their opponent was being, let's say, less than optimal with their choices.}

I don't necessarily find that positioning squadrons with ships to be more complex than positioning ships with ships

squadrons may be more dependent on ships, but they're easier to maneuver (straight line up to your maximum speed, ignoring negative effects from obstacles etc), they can move and then shoot (when commanded) whereas ships cannot, and Armada heavily rewards positioning multiple ships so that they can concentrate fire on the same target (Defense token mechanics)

predicting where the opponent will end up in order to Yavaris them is a skill anyone acquires with practice, same as predicting where the opponent will end up so you can pour on concentrated anti-ship fire with Nebs or paragon their face off. The maximum range is even comparable (Medium range + distance 1 for 90% of the range ruler) so you can keep Yavaris pretty safe while using B-wings to cover other ships.

being "not tactically sound" has little do to with it (especially not on the forums). If you're packing heavy long ranged superiority + B-wings and the opponent is packing VSDs (least maneuverable ship in the game, can't exactly dodge anything even B-wings) and a GSD (needs to get close, even with demolisher, or it's a very sh*tty neb), they're in-between a rock and a hard place that is not exactly trivial to dig out of

I don't necessarily find that positioning squadrons with ships to be more complex than positioning ships with ships

You may not, but the majority (at least in my personal play experience, watching matches on youtube and what I've seen with forum posts) do find it more complex due to decisions on when to use a squadron command vs a concentrate fire command that comes up with 2-3 command stack ships, avoiding potential engagement lock downs from enemy squadrons, positioning improperly in front of your own ships causing your opponent to move your squadrons after the ship moves, and so on.

Moving a ship is less complex as you don't need to think about where to position ship so as to make effective use of squadron distances when activated as well as concern from opposing ships firing arcs.

It is inherently more complex simply because you are increasing the number of variables to consider.

You are of course entitled to your opinion and I don't mean to come across otherwise -- hopefully im not, but wanted to state it just in case..... I am just posting a counterpoint to what you describe. My experience through gameplay, watching youtube replays and reading forum posts is that squadrons are harder to get effective use out of for the points that could otherwise be put into a ship that allows for easier movement and more consistent attacks on ships (can't be locked down through engagement rule) throughout a 6 round game.

I do continue to agree with Reiryc. To put it succinctly, a lot more can go wrong when you are using squadrons, all else equal.

First, using squadrons effectively requires co-ordination with ships, and your opponent knows that. Your squadrons have to "push" in roughly the direction their ship is going, otherwise they are going to end up out of squadron command range. If you have squadrons outside of squadron command range, it's trivial for ships to evade them. There are multiple components to squadron threat range and all of them have to work together:

1. The squadron itself has a threat range equal to its movement plus 1 range (or 2 range with Rhymer) when acting under a squadron command.
2. The squadron only has a threat range equal to 1 range or 2 range without a squadron command.
3. The squadron can receive a squadron command at up to medium range from a ship.
4. Therefore, for the squadron to operate at medium range of a ship PLUS the movement + engagement range of the squadron, it must be consistently in range to receive a squadron command.

This seems impressive on paper, but often falls prey to a few basic flaws: one, you have to deploy your squadrons forward and move them forward every turn in order to keep them far enough in front of your ships that your ship issuing a squadron command out to medium range allows your squadrons to move forward even more; in short, your deployment becomes relatively fixed and your opponent can time their screen arriving to lock them up. Two, it can be foiled by the incredibly complicated maneuver of simply flying in the other direction if you are facing it... if you move away from the ship, the squadrons either get a single command, fly out to engage you, and then are out of squadron command range, or they have to hold them back and not engage and travel with their ship instead. This is more viable for rebels (who often want to engage at long range) than imperials... which is to say, the rebel squadron approach is weakest against other rebel fleets! The Imperials, on the other hand, are reliant on either using fighters purely as a screen (and wasted points, in some cases) or with the Rhymer bomb to allow high speed + engagement range to carry them as long as the VSD giving squadron commands is alive.

Second, B-wings (and other slow ships) are often a "win more" mechanic: if your opponent was foolish enough to get close to those things unengaged, it's their own damned fault, as:

1. They are slow. The B-wing is speed 2. Even if you deploy them relatively far forward, their threat bubble is very small. You can give them squadron commands from medium range, but that doesn't push the B-wing itself forward any faster than speed 2 (they have to move on your own), so your opponent will always know roughly where they will be, and can either avoid them or plan to engage them properly.
2. They don't blow squadrons up quickly. B's throw 3 blue dice, which is an average of 1.5 hits per round on squadrons. That's 2 turns to even kill a basic TIE. If your opponent was merely trying to lock them up, they have probably killed your ship and are moving on by then.

Y-wings have the same problems but are a bit faster. Again, the core issue is that you have to either push squadrons in front to telegraph your moves, allowing non-VSD opponents to refuse to engage and/or hit you with their screen on the turn you would be sending out squadron commands (if you are first player and time it well, you can always get one off, but after that you are locked up).

This also ignores the command stack issues of needing to predict exactly what your opponent will do to time your squadron commands at the correct windows and/or just having to spam non-stop squadron commands (which locks out navigate and repair commands, both of which are essential to prevent ships from being dog-piled if the opposing fleet has superior speed, numbers, or both from a ship perspective).

So, again, I will say it:

In equally skilled hands, the ship-heavy fleet will have more degrees of freedom to engage than the squadron-heavy fleet, especially in like side matchups. Therefore, more often than not, the ship-heavy fleet will win a battle between equally skilled players.

The counter to this is that the squadron-heavy fleet needs to be able to consistently hit much harder AND pick objectives such that the ship-heavy fleet is forced to reduce its options for engagement. This is a difficult dance to get right, and I think B-wings are not the answer (other than Keyan in a list also including Yavaris and Adar Tallon on a non-Yavaris ship so that you can, in essence, create a 4-speed B-wing; this is fragile to combo disruption but exceptionally effective when it works).

As an example, the best rebel squadron-heavy list I have come up with is:

AFII Mk B with Gallant Haven, Adar Tallon, General Dodonna, Expanded Hangar Bay

Neb B Escort w/Yavaris

CR90A

Luke (or Wedge)

Keyan

Tycho

2 x A-wing

You need the A's and Tycho to pre-emptively get forward to lock up fighter screens that would otherwise wait and pounce on Luke and Keyan so you cannot use Yavaris with them. You have to keep the AF and Neb together to keep your squadrons near Gallant Haven to neuter an alpha strike against them. You need Adar to make sure you can get Keyan into the fight before activating him with Yavaris so that you can reliably dumb 4 black dice on anything that gets near Yavaris. You need at least one x-wing so that they can't alpha-strike Keyan. All of these things need to operate together and you need to not lose Yavaris on the way in to a fleet that can move quickly and rip off several activations that cripple it, possibly by deliberately sacrificing one cheap ship to the fighter screen.

This is the long way of saying I think this list is very good when played properly, but it has a lot of problems that can be exploited if you can break down the co-ordination / refuse to engage the blob / engage the blob with overwhelming numbers of activations such that it one of the lynchpins (the AFII or Yavaris) die extremely rapidly.

Or, in short, my CR90 spam fleet consistently beats it.

Bwings are not win more

"Win more" is strictly improving on something you can already do

NO rebel Ship until the shrimp frigate can output even close to as much close range damage.

If bwings were imperial, they'd be win more

Also, again, slow is relative. Commanded beings are (slightly mire than) medium range attacks from their initial position. The only thing in the game that can output black dice more easily are other bombers, demolisher, and sometimes insidious

The alternative to gsds and vsds not getting close to bwings is basically auto loss to long range rebels

Bwings are not win more

"Win more" is strictly improving on something you can already do

NO rebel Ship until the shrimp frigate can output even close to as much close range damage.

If bwings were imperial, they'd be win more

Also, again, slow is relative. Commanded beings are (slightly mire than) medium range attacks from their initial position. The only thing in the game that can output black dice more easily are other bombers, demolisher, and sometimes insidious

The alternative to gsds and vsds not getting close to bwings is basically auto loss to long range rebels

Once. In a bubble you know is coming. If it has a squadron command. [Edit: I assume you mean commanded b-wings and slightly more than, but have gotten screwed by auto-correct on a phone... I assume this because the same nonsense happens to me!]

Again, the mobility of B-Wings cannot be understated. You have range 2 move + range 1 attack. It's pretty obvious to know when you are going to be in that danger zone as an opponent... the B-wing is not going to sneak up on you, to say the least!

The reason I say they are win more is that if your opponent is willing to fly so predictably that he will lunge face-first into an obvious bear trap, you are going to win anyways unless you fail to maneuver at all. I mean, under what situation should a player fly unscreened into a swarm of B-wings? There literally is not one. You either avoid it (because slow) or, the turn you are going to arrive (which you know, because of their limited threat bubble), you jam your fighter screen into them.

I think our core disagreement is that you make squadron usage out to be much easier than I believe it to be; a squadron-heavy build is one of the things I am least scared of in the current meta (barring one specific type of Rhymer bomb), so either my opponents are all terrible at using them / significantly worse than me or there is something you are missing.

I suppose tournament results over the next year will tell the story, as right now it is purely academic.

It isn't a matter of being predictable it's a simple matter of range. Like everything in armada it's all about foresight not just of your opponent but yourself. With (more than) medium range coverage you can easily threaten areas your opponent would want to occupy (objectives, angles of approah, optimal attack ranges etc)

Unless you're running nothing but red dice you simply can't afford to ignore medium range

If people getting hit by squadrons is predictable then why aren't avoided squadrons predictable?

The rebels are heroes. Individuals with rules that make each one independently awesome and deadly for heroic deeds.

The imperials are a navy. Practiced, drilled, well-equipped and designed to work together.

Seems they're exactly what they're supposed to be. Meanwhile rebels have better (mostly) ship abilities to make those individuals even better. "Why not get two actions? Know what? Attack twice when you're in a good position. And hey, I'll protect you from damage and make anyone that gets close really pay the price".

I still have yet to see anyone effectively take Gallant Haven, predict that I'm going to try and blow it up quickly, and make me pay heavily for it.

bomber black dice are neither more nor less reliable than ship dice (They are, in fact, exactly the same). The only difference is bomber dice come in at one per attack, meaning they are far more difficult to mitigate with defense tokens (Especially brace).

Naked Bomber black dice are actually less reliable than modified Ship black dice. If you compare Major Rhymer + 5 TIE Bombers vs 1 ACM Gladiator with Screed (Note that you still have to pay for an Admiral with Bombers despite receiving no benefit), you'll find that the minimum damage of a single Gladiator attack from any arc to be 4. If you roll four blank die, you are still guaranteed 4 raw damage (3 with Brace) - 1 guaranteed damage per die - versus the Bombers who have a minimum damage of 0. Of course, you could get lucky and hit that maximum damage of 12. Then again, the gladiator could get just as lucky and hit it's maximum of 10 (12 if you have a Concentrate Fire dial in there).

So we have:

Rhymer + 5 Bombers: Min 0; Max 12 (0 - 10 with Brace flipped and discarded)

ACM Gladiator 1 arc: Min 4; Max 12 (3 - 7 with Brace)

ACM Gladiator 2 arc: Min 8; Max 22 (6 - 13 with Brace flipped and discarded)

So if I see a target that I absolutely need to drop 6 damage on, is it better for me to perform the "delicate dance" of setting up Rhymer's Bomber Ball to attack that target, or a Gladiator? It's an easy answer, because the Gladiator is guaranteed to inflict that number, while every dice the Bombers roll is going to be nail-bitingly suspenseful.

While Gladiators with Screed are clearly one of the closest apples-to-apples examples of a points to points comparison, all Ships have access to abilities and upgrades to increase reliability of dice, but Bombers do not. When Ships are throwing the dice, they're almost always going to be more reliable than when Bombers throw them - See: CR90a v. 3 X-Wings, or Raymus Salvation v 6 X-Wings for other same dice color comparisons.

So it's true that as the number of Bomber attacks increases, the effect of your defense tokens approaches zero. But the more Bombers you have, the more vulnerable they become and the harder it is to set up shots for them. It's easy to get 2 Bombers into a position to shoot, but it's really hard to get 12 into range 1. And if you have Rhymer to increase the range, you suddenly have a very dense ball of Bombers that can be effectively shut down by any stray Squadron that moseys on by.

It brings us back around to highlight how much has to go into making your Bombers work for you. If you want to ward off a Demolisher from your Yavaris with B-Wings, sure you can have the B-Wings sit astride the Yavaris, ready to return fire when it pounces. But it only takes 1 Interceptor to jump on them and foil the plan. So you say you just have your Squadrons move in and kill the Interceptor. Well, every Squadron activated during a Squadron Command means one less B-Wing can activate (And if you activate the B-Wings with Flight Controllers as suggested earlier, then they won't be attacking the Demolisher at all this round). So maybe you take it a step further and you just hold the B-Wings slightly back, ready to be activated by Command, and leave your X-Wing sitting next to Yavaris to prevent my Interceptor from engaging the B-Wings. Great, but I will still send my Interceptor in because that's a whole Range 1 no-fly zone for your B-Wings if you still want them to shoot the Demolisher.

There are lots of potential 'solutions' to this scenario that inevitably end up with 1 or 2 ships spamming Squadron Commands every turn and having your Squadrons/Bomber in perfect positions. You can do that, or you can just go buy another ACM Gladiator.

Keep in mind, though, that Wave 2 and the introduction of Intel is going to completely change everything we know about Bombers up to now. They're just unreliable at Wave 1, but things are looking up. And if future waves ever come out with an anti-ship battery version of Flight Controllers, combined with Intel escorts, the Squadron game may actually be on.

couple fallacies about the above:

1.) the probability of more than 1 bomber doing 0 damage gets steadily, laughably lower.

the heavy use of Tie bombers specifically with Rhymer is not something I would recommend. Maybe one extra bomber, if any; the rest need to be at least Tie Advance at the risk of under-preparing for enemy squadrons. The damage they output is still significant enough (far outweighting a mere CF command) and they won't lopside your fleet.

on the rebel side, B-wings are also polarizing but they're not absolutely worthless against squadrons, especially not with yavaris. 3-4 per squadron allotment is not unreasonable.

2.) if anything, application of ACM GSDs is far harder than applying B-wings. That's close range versus larger than medium (> 150% greater), and it's tied directly to the ship (putting it in harms way). The only GSD that can reliably unload its black dice with less difficulty than bombers is the Demolisher, and that is a unique title (plus related expenses, such as Engine Techs). The minimum damage of an ACM GSD is, in fact, 0 (that's when it attacks at anything but close range)

I seriously believe getting reliable ACM barrages out of non-demolisher GSDs is a much greater display of skill than me just chucking B-wings at people. This is also probably why I see far more Skreed + squadron support VSD & Demolisher than just a bunch of ACM GSDs (well that, and the need for a squadron support VSD to tie up enemy B-wings to safely deliver the Demolisher)

3.) the ease of which interceptors screw over bombers is heavily exaggerated

even the infamous Demolisher will have to end up in close range of an enemy ship on the round it moves in to unload its black dice. It can, at most, make a speed 1 maneuver after it onloads it demolisher shot. In that turn, the imperial player can indeed chuck interceptors at the enemy bombers to tie them up. Here's the rub:

if the Demolisher didn't use a squadron command, then the supporting ship threw the bombers during its activation and they arrived before the Demolisher.

after the Demolisher attacks, it is done moving. It's not going anywhere for the rest of the round.

you have X amount of Interceptors engaging Bs or their escort

so, we already have a very clear option presented for the rebel player: kill the X interceptors before the B-wings activate. This is basically what I always do when derping around with 3 nebs, queing up squadrons on both escorts or even adding Salvation for the round when I'm in danger of getting jumped by demolisher. This gives you at least an escort activation prior to yavaris, which between X-wings and anti-squadron barrages clears 3 generic interceptors with expected dice results if you qued squadron token turn 1.

As long as you get 2 bombers disengaged (8 potential dice over 4 attacks, before Yavaris itself shoots), the GSD is in for a world of hurt

that is, of course, assuming you don't take the proactive approach (with initiative, sling A-wings at interceptors before they engage B-wings)

none of this involves "spamming squadron commands every turn." The longer it takes for the imperials to engage, the greater advantage they give to the rebels and their superior long range forces. Even the 80 point demolisher is a shite CR-90 when its not at close range.

this is a delicate dance that both sides must undertake; all in a day's work for this deeply complex game

That's it Fickle ! The use of colours is what you need to do to emphasize your points, much more visually communicative as well as much more visually appealing, I'm loving the new you

In all seriousness, great points as always (and I'm serious about the colours and bold, it's cooler to read ).

I'd love to hear your take on the Aces and how they should be included in a squadron strategy. Interestingly enough, I feel the Imperial Aces (bar from Darth Vader) are much more synergetic with each other (I faced a list that only had Mauler, Howlrunner, Soontir and Vader with Chiraneau and Flight Controllers + Expanded Hangar Bay and they worked terribly well together with 5 to 6 blue dices each save for Vader who was tanking like a boss). On the other hand, the Rebels are pros at what they do but are more of a one trick pony.

Cheers !

EDIT : After giving a bit more thoughts about the Rebel Fighters, I think there's an interesting difference compared to Imperial Squadrons. I think that there is a key differentiator amongst the Rebel Fighters that perhaps we've all felt but I don't remember reading it put that way on the forum.

Imperial Fighters differ from one another in terms of specialty. TIE Bombers are Bombers. TIE Fighters are swarm anti-fighters. TIE Advanced are bomber escorts. TIE Interceptors are fast Interceptors.

Rebels as we all know are by far more generalists than Imperials, that's a given. Obviously, all have their specialties within that generalization, but I think one of the key differences between them is timing of their attack based on their speed and attack dice.

Indeed, with such massive speed differences between the ships with a fastest at 5 and a slowest at 2 (and the difference between 2 and 3 is quite huge as well over a couple of turns while Imperials are pretty much fast), what differentiate between Rebel Fighters is at which time they will attack ships (not squadrons, and here's why).

1) A-Wings : You can afford to send A-Wings against an Imperial ship relatively early on. Statistically, 4 A-Wings will deal 3 damage to the ship thanks to their black dice and no Bomber. Afterwards, they're likely to get tied up in combat but still go quite a bit of damage in the fighter game. A-Wings can afford to be intercepted, and as a matter of fact, the more people they're forced to face, the better mileage you get from them.

2) Y-Wings have both Bomber and a Black Dice against ships, but they only have a speed of 3 and a hull of 6 that allow them to take punishment when they'll get intercepted. You want their first attack to be against ships rather than other fighters, in early to mid game, then they can get tarpitted.

3) X-Wings : Bomber and a red dice is quite good against ships for sure, but they're not as good as Y-Wings. With a speed of 3, you want them to attack ships mid to late game, while early to mid game they should work on fighter superiority with the squadron commands.

4) B-Wings : Very slow, correct hull points, only 3 anti-squadrons. You want to reserve B-Wings late game to finish off ships due to excellent anti-ship armament (that comes as no surprise for everyone). Their anti-squadron is only when they absolutely need to finish stuff off that annoy them.

As Rebels, I feel by if we look at Squadrons based on when we want to attack ships rather than what we want to fight with them, it opens up a lot of tactical opportunities.

I don't have many games under my belt at all since I have almost no one to play with (The price I pay for living in rural Indiana) but in my opinion, and from my imperial perspective, I think the rebel fighters are top notch. They scare me more than the capital ships to be honest. I think a rebel player should dominate if his imperial opponent does not devote many points into a strong squadron presence.

I myself always always ALWAYS max out my squadron points because I firmly believe that is the best way for the empire to compete. If the Empire plays the numbers game, then the Reb player should be worried. However, if the Imp commander loves to go ship heavy and only field 4 or so squadrons, the Reb should have an easy go of it. This is all just my two cents. Of course, I'm a big history buff so my opinion is heavily based off of the doctrine from WWII where carriers replaced battleships as ruler of the seas.

If anyone has any experiences/opinions to the contrary of mine, I'd love to hear how your minimal squad list played out and the tactics you used to succeed. I feel like if you don't outnumber the Reb squads by at least 3 squadrons, you're at a HUGE disadvantage and that you're ignoring the main swarm doctrine of the Imperial Navy.

We will be getting buffs for squadrons in the wave 2 squad packs in the form of the Intel game mechanic that puts heavy on opposing squadrons. So remember that we are in a changing process and don't have all the tools yet.

Wave 2 also introduces Rogue which is a godsend for low Squadron lists looking to incorporate squadrons

Moving only after commanded ships is a drawback, but with them and presumably more expensive; higher impact large ship squadrons (more bang for low squadron by k) you could see a few of them farting around with cr90s, shrimps, and raiders

Imperial Fighters differ from one another in terms of specialty. TIE Bombers are Bombers. TIE Fighters are swarm anti-fighters. TIE Advanced are bomber escorts. TIE Interceptors are fast Interceptors.

I haven't been able to bring myself to use Tie Advanced yet, but I'm not sure they are bomber escorts.

Tie fighters and interceptors have only three health. When I run a mixed Tie bomber and fighter force, I'm often happy if the incoming fighters target my bombers rather than the fighters. My fighters are really easy to one shot, and once they are dead, my bombers aren't capable of killing off the enemy fighters themselves, whereas if each bomber absorbs three hits, and in return my fighters can kill his fighters, it means my bombers are still more than capable of being effective what with the general lack of anti squadron capability from most cap ships.

In this regard, I feel if I did use Tie advanced if would be to screen my Tie interceptors more than the bombers. But this is just theory, no practical application yet.

It's true that the TIE Bombers can take a beating due to 5 hull points, but I was thinking about a Bomber Wing with Rhymer, another Bomber and 2 TIE Advanced. Now you're having a decent anti-squadron value, but a decent anti-ship at long range. Combined with Chiraneau, they are going to be hard to catch and the Bombers will survive long enough to be a constant pain if the enemy doesn't deal with the Advanced as fast as possible.

I'm not sure the Advanced are worth it to cover Interceptors because it prevents their Counter ability. Obviously a TIE Advanced with Soontir will work wonders (especially Vader that can take a beating), but for Regular Interceptors you kind of want them to be shot at with Counter 2 and swarms.

Well you are not the only one. The Nationals Champions had 0 (count to that without using any hands) that's 0 squadrons.

The Starfighter combat is the weakpoint of Armada, Now while Armada is not focused on Starfighter combat Star Wars is focused on Star Fighter combat. There really was only one space battle scene that included nothing but capital ships and that was the unfair fight at the beginning.

So far my best win ratio has been with a minimal fighter list featuring Howlrunner, Mauler Mithel, Soontir Fel and a tie advanced. The group stays largely together. Mauler of course does either a good initial hit or I use him to finish off pesky A-wings that would get that extra counterattack.

I was reading all the post, but think I only made it to the end of page two. The rebel fighters are very good, and either you are going against some with out of normal dice rolls or I am, but my Empire fighters can not last more than one, very rarely two rounds. Why, you may ask the rebel fighters tear them up and any that survive are killed by ships, leaving his fighters to move on to attacking my ships with out any escorts left. I can see lots of reason why the Empire player would go without fighters (main one they die so fast), but the fighter is the main attack force of the rebles. Just my thoughts.