In the Marine Corps, we used to have a saying for a Marine who was performing poorly with respect to his marksmanship: "It's not the DOPE on the weapon, it's the dope behind the weapon."

Dope, in this context, was a homonym referring to 2 different things: The "DOPE" on the weapon was referring to windage and elevation settings; it's actually an acronym for Data On Personal Equipment. (For those unfamiliar with rifle ballistics, those are dials that allow you to change your left-right targeting (windage), generally due to wind, and/or your up/down targeting (elevation), generally as a result of bullet-drop due to gravity. Thus, Marines who were shooting poorly would blame it on their windage and elevation settings, ie, their dope, and the rest of the unit would tease them that the problem was the idiot firing the weapon.

______________

So, after about 8 games of Armada, the only ship i'm really struggling with is the Nebulon B. I can't figure out what it's supposed to do. It doesn't have a clear purpose to me. That big meaty flank is a blessing and a curse. You want to roll so you can take advantage of your guns (especially if putting on Enhanced Armaments), but then you open yourself up to return fire and just get crushed with that 1 shield.

It seems like a generalist to me, but it's a generalist with a very obvious and very exploitable achilles heel. So, it doesn't really rock or papers or scissors but it sure as hell gets rocked.

Firepower? Average all around.

Maneuverability? Average.

Speed? Good-ish, but without good manueverability, you cannot expect to get your flanks tucked-in when you need to.

Hull/Durability: Weak. Those 1-shield flanks and no re-direct tokens really hurt.

Ratings: Meh. Command is not high enough to really horde tokens, but is too high to play in reactive mode (like the CR-90). Squadron is never good enough to actually make a "Squadron based ship" out of, and no upgrades for expanded hangar bays. Engineering is nice, but not nice enough to cover the glaring weakness of flanks. ahtough I'd probably argue this is it's best Asset.

Cost: The stats/numbers would seem to be appropriate for its cost, but I'm just finding that the sum of the Neb-b is less than it's parts.

Has anyone figured out a really good way to outfit this ship and use it?

1. keep things in your front arc, and let them come to you

2. better off as a sqadron command ship

but yea.. it just isn't defensivly good enough for me to bother with it anymore.

In short:

1. The Nebulon B is probably the worst of the rebel ships in "vanilla" form; it wants to engage the Imperials head on (bad, because although the Neb B is good at it, the VSD is much, much better) and it has very weak sides that can easily be damaged (Gladiator captains basically react like a 13 year old girl at a Taylor Swift concert when they see a Neb B).
2. After trying it in many games, with some pretty decent players in my area, none of us have been able to make it work. Some of us are the kinds of people who have won X-wing tournaments and what not, so I don't think it's just that we're rank amateurs who don't know what we are doing. The ship just has flaws easily identifiable and exploitable by the enemy.

With that said, there are two cases where we have found the Neb B to work well enough that it is worth including in a fleet:

1. Salvation with X17 Turbolasers and possibly Raymus Antilles: If your average Neb B deals 2.25 (3 with concentrate fire) damage from the front arc on red dice, Salvation cranks this up to 3 (4 with concentrate fire) or even slightly more with Raymus. That's a pretty big jump, and it also makes the Neb B a "must kill" for the opponent, so you know they aren't going to leave it alone in the backfield and can plan for them to come for it.
2. Yavaris with the right escorts. This is more complicated, as you really need to build a fleet around this idea, otherwise a handful of squadrons can lock up your bombers and the opponent can kill Yavaris. However, when the staggering works properly, this ship can deliver a ton of damage.

It really is a support ship and needs the titles and escortsto become effective.

Yvaris and salvation are obvious. Throw a couple of bwings with them to cover their flanks.

What I found surprising is how much I love runing redemption with three corvettes. This is surprisingly effective if played properly.

Giving my Neb-Bs Navigation Team caused them to become FAR more effective. Support with one or more CV-90 with Dial-fixing, and you've got yourselves a setup.

Salvation+XI7+Intelligence officer=lance of the gods. Yes, I know Raymus is a really good choice over Intelligence officers for Salvation in ensuring the damage potential is consistently maximized, but Intelligence officers almost works like an accuracy result which is something that ship dearly needs as a guarantee (dual arcing it has a lot smaller returns due to its title's nature, you can only count on one good attack and defense tokens mitigate single attacks well... not redirect, but brace and evade. Naturally, it's also opening up enemy ships to a better angle of attack on its flanks if you try to range in both arcs).

I don't use the RAF Mk.II, I play a weird mix for offence and defence with a dual Nebulon list between the somewhat shooty (somewhat shooty; with a CR90 as a first trick activation and a fairly healthy smack on the flank, that Concentrate fire and smug choice of the Opening Salvo objective looked a little less certain for my opponent. It turned a VSD to dust, then got Demolisher the turn after that. Hot dice, sure, but the output potential is great), and with Yvaris's contingent, it's been decent for me.

Yvaris works as a close-in guarantee of fighter protection but close range haymaker in any arc from its fighter screen. A few bombers (B-wings are naturally great as they work with the Nebulon's often slow approach pattern; I've seen FickleGreen talk about it enough so it's not new ) and a few interceptors can ward off some assaults and act as a frightening prospect up close while Salvation causes some damage on the way in. That said, Yvaris is often something of a trap in itself for fast moving ships that get too close. The Nebulon's sides are just such a tempting target that most people instinctively go right for them, and for good reason. But if you can survive a squadron activation of B wings, or even cheap Y-wings with an X-wing escort, you deserve that shot. And yes, they really work well paired up as a squadron on their own.

The Nebulon-B is a pretty good ship in my books, but it's a bit of a one trick pony as far as its face value tactics are concerned. It gets a lot out of a slow approach, but its narrow front arc profile is both terrible for sighting in opponent's ships and for making the most of its adequate front shields. Its sides are weak but its double brace is still pretty impressive, which means it can take a slightly inordinate amount of punishment. Most of the scary tricks are from its titles, and while Redemption is probably going to be better in a 400 point game where you're really in it to keep more ships (or just more pricy ships) alive, Salvation and Yvaris are jewels while Gallant Haven is just the poster boy. They're direct, and in this case they're not overly manoeuvrable, so they don't match the CR-90 or RAF Mk.II in play style which means you're using two very different elements in the same fleet. The synergy is often harder to pull off when their attack vectors are so divergent from the other ships in the rebel fleet.

There are some not too old threads on this. But to recap.

The Neb-b is a powerful ship used correctly. It is best at long range only from the front. So the most popular and effective usage has been a "Neb Line". So 2-4 Nebs in a line protecting each other's flanks. This line engages the enemy slowly at speed 1. Let them come to you and maximize the time you are in the Neb sweet spot. Bring along B-wings for support. You're already driving slowly so the B-wings don't mind that. Then they act as a force multiplier. I usually see three Nebs, salvation, Yavaris, and a random third. Yavaris is there to allow your Bs to double tap enemy ships for a ton of damage. The total dice for those three units is 3 red, 4 blue, 4 black. That's power and is great vs annoying GSD tactics. the other thing to remember is that sometimes you start fast to flank the enemy formation, then put on the brakes to engage. Done right, you will get a turn of taking on only a single enemy ship.

probably already covered, but

The Neb Escort Frigate is the cheapest source of 2-anti blue dice in the game, and it comes stapled to Squadron 2. It has decent firepower and is a great squadron support tool.

Yavaris outputs the single greatest damage per activation in the game. Activating 2 B-wings with this baby results in 8 dice. Hell, getting Yavaris with just one and then slinging another gives you a better version of a VSD-2's front arc (Before the Neb itself gets to shoot)

Salvation is a rail-rifle on (Space) wheels. By doubling the damage of critical results (each one you roll), it gives your Red dice 3/8 faces that do double damage, 2/8 that do one, 1/8 with accuracy, and 2/8 with blanks.

The overall percentile of an effective result remains unchanged (75%), but instead of 50% chance of doing 1 damage + 12.5% of doing 2 damage + 12.5% of accuracy you get 25% of doing 1 damage + 37.5% of doing 2 + 12.15% of accuracy.

combine with Raymus, spam concentrate fire when possible (and face your front arc available, otherwise Raymus's "Super navigates" can really help set up shots) and you'll pretty much get star destroyer levels of damage from a 65 point, long range ship.

the main advantages of the Neb is 1.) anti-squadron 2.) general cheapness 3.) titles, which require very minimal support to make amazing impactful (Salvation wants Raymus, Yavaris doesn't need a thing)

Hate Nebs. They're a liability. Everyone keeps talking about using them with B-Wangs and titles/upgrades but in order to use squadron commands you've got to be up in the grill of the enemy - yet everyone also says you can't get too close to the enemy. I'll take my shots for five out of six turns with a relatively nimble Mk.2 AF rather than waiting for that squadron alpha strike you can MAYBE use twice over the entire game.

Edit - fgd posted while I was typing - The problem with slapping Raymus on a Neb is that means you're not slapping him on an AF.

this "up the grill of the enemy" is hilariously exaggerated

between medium range commands and more than medium range move with B-wings (close range + distance 1 > medium range), you have to be doing something wrong to be up in someone's grill

if Yavarising, it's just medium range + distance 1; ideal for wiping out squadrons that can't hurt your nebs, or that Demolisher you just can't avoid no matter what ship you use

highly prefer intel officers on my fatties than raymus. Big punch but low volume of attack needs something to get through tokens

if nebs are a liability, one must ultimately come to terms with the fact that's it's most likely that Nebs just aren't their preferred playstyle, not that nebs suck. In a way, then, there is a dope behind the gun. It's the player

It is what it is. I personally don't enjoy flying 1 VSD & 1 GSD, but I'd be lying if I said they weren't effective

I guess I shouldn't be surprised that your response is that I'm a dope as that's often the tone of your responses, but since this entire forum is essentially speculation and opinion, I don't feel terribly dope-ish and stand by mine. I don't apologize for thinking there are more effective and efficient ways to construct a list in Armada than focusing on Nebs and squadrons and feel confident that will pan out as we move forward.

The excellence of the titles and a line of Nebulons has been discussed. I'd also like to mention their use in area control. With three red dice in front, especially on Salvation, you have a cone in which a slow moving ship does not want to sit, and tempting side arcs that faster ships want to target, which on one ship gives you a lot of control over where your opponent is likely to move. I have used Salvation in a 3 Corvette list with Mon Mothma, and while the Corvettes can end up almost anywhere, Salvation draws a lot of the battle lines, as my opponent decides which ships want to be near it and which don't, which then allow me to deploy my Corvettes to maximum effect for getting behind them.

As ships with high forward firepower, good defense tokens at longer range and the ability to equip support team upgrades, you can make a ship that is highly effective at long range, which can effectively command a bomber screen to offset its close range weakness, and which can be upgraded to maneuver well out of the way and maximize its fire arc. Once the enemy has closed on you, you can activate 2 B-wings to punish them for it, or potentially use a Nav command with Engine Techs to leap from speed 1 to an effective speed 3, or even speed 4, which tends to put you out of harm's way and screw up your opponent's maneuvering.

I guess I shouldn't be surprised that your response is that I'm a dope as that's often the tone of your responses

Wow, way to completely misread what FGD was saying. He quite clearly was saying that if someone can't make effective use of a Neb B it's not because the person is bad at the game, it's because the play style of Neb's doesn't suit that person.

There is no one best list for Armada, but to to claim that Neb's are bad and no one can use them effectively just because you don't find them effective is highly arrogant.

this "up the grill of the enemy" is hilariously exaggerated

between medium range commands and more than medium range move with B-wings (close range + distance 1 > medium range), you have to be doing something wrong to be up in someone's grill

if Yavarising, it's just medium range + distance 1; ideal for wiping out squadrons that can't hurt your nebs, or that Demolisher you just can't avoid no matter what ship you use

highly prefer intel officers on my fatties than raymus. Big punch but low volume of attack needs something to get through tokens

if nebs are a liability, one must ultimately come to terms with the fact that's it's most likely that Nebs just aren't their preferred playstyle, not that nebs suck. In a way, then, there is a dope behind the gun. It's the player

It is what it is. I personally don't enjoy flying 1 VSD & 1 GSD, but I'd be lying if I said they weren't effective

FGD, it's the red/bolded part above where I think your assumption is off. I would submit that there is no such thing. With 1 shield on that big, fat, wide flank, anything can hurt your neb. Even a single blue die. Once that shield gets chewed through, your defense tokens are useless against squadrons. (1 damage = no brace, and range 1 = no evade).

I guess I shouldn't be surprised that your response is that I'm a dope as that's often the tone of your responses

Wow, way to completely misread what FGD was saying. He quite clearly was saying that if someone can't make effective use of a Neb B it's not because the person is bad at the game, it's because the play style of Neb's doesn't suit that person.

There is no one best list for Armada, but to to claim that Neb's are bad and no one can use them effectively just because you don't find them effective is highly arrogant.

I don't know, I am kind of with Drunk Tarkin on this one. I've argued in circles with FGD as well, and while I think he makes some good points in theory, I think in practice they don't pan out the way he expects unless his opponent is quite poor. However, completely refusing to concede anything in an argument despite this means that, to people who test these things, he comes across as kind of a ****.

I don't think this is intentional, to be clear. But I think it is the effect.

So, man, this is a huge mistake, but Drunk Tarkin, you are probably right about this one, with one exception:

One of what I feel are my two best lists includes a single Neb B (the other includes only corvettes). It's my 5 ship (1 Neb, 4 corvette list), and it's Salvation + X17 Turbolasers on a support refit. I find it effective because the opponent HAS to come deal with it, which means they aren't effectively chasing the 4 corvettes around. But everything you say about the weakness of the Neb is what makes it tempting bait and the perfect lure for a trap in an otherwise very, very fast list with objectives that support it.

I think in practice they don't pan out the way he expects unless his opponent is quite poor.

But that's not the point, or at least not the point I got. Drunk Tarkin seemed to be offended at some sort of personal attack FGD was making. Something he wasn't actually doing the way I read it.

He wasn't calling Drunk Tarkin a dope as in he's stupid or something. Just saying that if someone has problems using the Neb's effective then the issue may very well be with the player not the ship.

That has nothing to do with how good of a player FGD himself is.

I honestly don't understand how anyone can be offended by suggesting that the game is more open and diverse than player experience might suggest, especially if they then go on to imply that the people I play against (whom have never been met apparently by people on this forum) just aren't good at the game

I simply want to caution everyone about a very common fallacy gamers tend to make in every game out there, namely "I can't use it effective, therefore it is not effective."

while there are cases where game balance is off enough to make this observation (ordnance in X-wing miniatures), there are no mechanics in place that suggest the objective ineffectiveness of an entire ship class and an entire half of the game (squadrons)

the far more likely alternative, then, is simply that the playstyle in question does not appeal. This is wholly understandable, as any game with variety does not contain said variety to appeal to everyone (a basically impossible feat) but to cater to a wider array of player types. The slower, formation dependent playstyle of the Neb B + squadrons requires a completely different approach to the edge-of-your-seat, concentrated surgical strike of the imperial Demolisher & friends, for example

this claim is, I feel, very reasonable especially considering we're not pointing fingers at the professional game designers for mucking up and we're not pointing fingers at people we never met somehow being inferior at the game

the dope behind the gun isn't a dumbass nor is the gun itself a dope. Like a sniper with an RPG or a tank hunter with a revolver, they've just been given the wrong gun.

remember, variety is the lifeblood of any game in existence without which the game would become stale and repetitive. Better then to dismiss certain ideas because they are not personally appealing, rather than them just being ineffective unless there is no other option.

But that's not the point, or at least not the point I got. Drunk Tarkin seemed to be offended at some sort of personal attack FGD was making. Something he wasn't actually doing the way I read it.

He wasn't calling Drunk Tarkin a dope as in he's stupid or something. Just saying that if someone has problems using the Neb's effective then the issue may very well be with the player not the ship.

That has nothing to do with how good of a player FGD himself is.

I guess I shouldn't be surprised that your response is that I'm a dope as that's often the tone of your responses

Wow, way to completely misread what FGD was saying. He quite clearly was saying that if someone can't make effective use of a Neb B it's not because the person is bad at the game, it's because the play style of Neb's doesn't suit that person.

There is no one best list for Armada, but to to claim that Neb's are bad and no one can use them effectively just because you don't find them effective is highly arrogant.

So each gamer has some inherent characteristic that either allows them to understand how to use a unit or not in a wargame, and this is called "playstyle"? The core of it, regardless of the label, the person somehow cannot use the unit correctly. It's fine, no blood-no foul. Let's please continue the original discussion - without telling people that their responses are wrong because they don't have the right "playstyle".

unfortunately, "playstyle" matters immensly

you're not going to slap E-techs on Salvation and expect it to go around ***** slapping things into submission ala Demolisher, do you?

hell, you can't even throw on EA and have to strafe at long range like a fattie, because of those big spindly sides

the capability of ships in Armada are a very wide range of stats and combinations thereof which lead to drastically different utility and range of effective specializations; it is very likely that the effective ways in which ship X can be utilized are simply not appealing to certain players

this is, after all, a game. The ultimate purpose is personal satisfaction, and if someone isn't finding that in a certain ship then why would he/she force his/herself to use it? If forced, there is easily room for ineffective play not out of lack of understanding as much as lack of enthusiasm or care (as in, "who cares if the Neb is good or not, I'm not playing it if it bores me"). Anyone can understand the theory all they want (it's useful for counter-playing the list), but if they don't find it enjoyable then they simply aren't going to use it. We're not getting paid for playing, after all

hell, I don't like CR-90s and I don't like just having a single GSD. I don't find that kind off either running around, concentrating fire or zooming in for a surgical strike to be the least bit appealing to me personally. I also don't let that color my impression of those ships' effectiveness as a whole, nor does it lead me to doubt that other players can't use them more effectively

The core of it, regardless of the label, the person somehow cannot use the unit correctly.

It's not a cannot, but rather a does not. No two people think the same way, and some people will have something that is easy to them, but is very difficult if not nearly impossible for someone else. This is I would dare say, not a shocking concept to anyone.

That means that yes in fact some play styles won't appeal to some type of people and they will struggle with the game if they try to play that way. In MMO's some people love playing healers, others tanks. By and large if you force someone who enjoys playing as a tank into the healer role, they won't do well at it. This isn't a comment on their overall ability to play the game, but rather about that given roll.

If you have two players, and one says that unit X is great, and another that says unit X is bad, they can both be correct in regards to how the unit works for them. This is IMO much more likely then what seems to be implied here... Namely that the only reason some people like the Neb is because the people they play against are bad.

One: Inefficient list building is not "playstyle", it's making sub-optimal choices.

I think the point DT is making is that if someone pretty consistently makes strong choices and has a lot of success at this game, and thinks the Neb B is not good because they consistently defeat it when they face it despite the best efforts of other opponents, and consistently don't succeed with it themselves, it's possible that the ship is just not very good in any group of hands. That's not "playstyle". It's not "playstyle" that the Tie Advanced has sucked for most of the history of X-Wing in tournament play, and it's not that people weren't using it effectively or missed some kind of magic trick or had preferences that did not fit it. It just cost too many points for what it did, and there was other stuff that did those things better, for any effective playstyle.

This is not to go down the rabbit hole of "play what you want because you like it"; that is fine, I don't think anyone on here is going to tell you DO NOT HAVE FUN EVER. I think the question DT is attempting to address is "if I were going to a tournament, and if I am trying to find the things that consistently give me the highest probability to win, is the Neb B on that list"? Or, in short, his playstyle is "what wins"? If the Nebulon B doesn't fit that, it tells you something, just like it did with the Tie Advanced in X-Wing. It's not a question of "may not be using it effectively" but rather that, if you want to win against strong and skilled opponents in competitive situations, it just might not be good enough to be usable.

That's not a judgment call based on subjective feeling about what is fun. It's not about appeal to certain players. That is an objective test for what consistently succeeds across a variety of situations. The person who does it best is likely to win the tournament.

Refusing to engage with arguments, or when people say they have used the Nebulon B in a variety of ways (including the ones you described) and describe the tactics others used to shut them down, only to have you come back and say "well your playstyle is wrong for it" is pounding the table, not engaging in debate; you will annoy people with this.

unfortunately, "playstyle" matters immensly

you're not going to slap E-techs on Salvation and expect it to go around ***** slapping things into submission ala Demolisher, do you?

hell, you can't even throw on EA and have to strafe at long range like a fattie, because of those big spindly sides

the capability of ships in Armada are a very wide range of stats and combinations thereof which lead to drastically different utility and range of effective specializations; it is very likely that the effective ways in which ship X can be utilized are simply not appealing to certain players

this is, after all, a game. The ultimate purpose is personal satisfaction, and if someone isn't finding that in a certain ship then why would he/she force his/herself to use it? If forced, there is easily room for ineffective play not out of lack of understanding as much as lack of enthusiasm or care (as in, "who cares if the Neb is good or not, I'm not playing it if it bores me"). Anyone can understand the theory all they want (it's useful for counter-playing the list), but if they don't find it enjoyable then they simply aren't going to use it. We're not getting paid for playing, after all

hell, I don't like CR-90s and I don't like just having a single GSD. I don't find that kind off either running around, concentrating fire or zooming in for a surgical strike to be the least bit appealing to me personally. I also don't let that color my impression of those ships' effectiveness as a whole, nor does it lead me to doubt that other players can't use them more effectively

I agree with this, hence the thread title is a question, basically summed up as "Hey, is it me, or is it the ship?" I think it might be me; I *hope* it's me, because I really want to like the Neb-B. Like you said, for whatever reason, the CR90 doesn't get me excited. But I can get the CR90 to do what I need it to do. I can't get the Neb-B to perform for me. That makes me sad. I will try out some of the suggestions mentioned herein.

One: Inefficient list building is not "playstyle", it's making sub-optimal choices.

Your right, but that also doesn't mean that playstyle doesn't exist or has a factor in the game.

it's possible that the ship is just not very good in any group of hands.

A dataset of 5-10 people is meaningless. Just because no one in that group does well with it does not prove anything. Maybe no one in that group is as good as they think.

It's not "playstyle" that the Tie Advanced has sucked for most of the history of X-Wing in tournament play

You're right, and when we have even a full year of Armada tournaments to pull data from, then and only then can we make truly objective comments about how good or bad a ship really is.

only to have you come back and say "well your playstyle is wrong for it" is pounding the table, not engaging in debate; you will annoy people with this.

Making claims that the only reason someone does well with it, is because the people they are playing with are bad is not engaging in the debate either. Neither is claiming personal attacks when no such thing was intended.

All I am saying is this:

1. DT (and the rest of the IFF crew) have played quite a bit, and unless someone else is presenting concrete evidence and in-game situations they are encountering through things like battle reports, I am inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt.
2. DT is not the only person who had this reaction to what was said, or has had this same kind of interaction with FGD.
3. It is actually a possible reason that someone would perceive the Neb B as good because their opponents are bad; in that case, the person probably went with whatever they thought was good and have been consistently winning, thus communicating the information that what they are using is good when the real information is that the people they are playing is bad.

Another reason we tend to have a strong preference for tournament results; it eliminates problem 3.

So I would ask this: from most of the accounts I see on here and on IFF, I don't see super squadron builds winning many tournaments (though I can remember one that a Rhymer-style list won). I also don't see the Neb B as a key element of many winning lists, especially not with B-wings (other than perhaps Farlander in the Rebel Aces AFII-Neb-CR90 + Aces build, which is one of the niche Neb B cases mentioned here).

Why is this?

Refusing to engage with arguments, or when people say they have used the Nebulon B in a variety of ways (including the ones you described) and describe the tactics others used to shut them down, only to have you come back and say "well your playstyle is wrong for it" is pounding the table, not engaging in debate; you will annoy people with this.

I have described the counter-counter tactics in other threads, as well as shown how that actual threat range of B-wings is far greater than is let on in the forums (a product of the range mechanics in this game; nothing to do with my personal opinion)

the only table pounding going on is from these very strangely intense posts that just refuse to believe that any other view point could be correct, instead forcing the scenario that my opponents are "bad" and that I am somehow being a prick for suggesting that an entire type of ship can be more effective than is being let on

honestly, I don't know where the necessity for such intense conviction is coming from. Unlike the posts being levied against me, I am not accusing anyone of being this vague notion of "bad/unskilled/not tactical" and am simply suggesting that the Nebs may not personally appeal to certain players

this is a game, guys. I'm not attacking your character or accusing you of being bad at your job or something.